HARDLY had Henry Clay seated himself again in the Speaker’s chair and
appointed the select committee on military affairs, when the process
of reorganizing the government on a new and energetic footing began.
November 19, David R. Williams, chairman of the military committee,
reported a bill raising the soldiers’ pay to eight dollars a month,
and exempting them from arrest for debt. At any previous moment in
national history such a bill would have aroused paroxysms of alarm, but
the Republicans of 1812 were obliged to accept it without a protest,
and with grave doubts whether it would prove effective; while the
Federalists tried only to strike out the clause which allowed minors
above eighteen years of age to enlist without the consent of their
parents, guardians, or masters. On this subject Josiah Quincy made a
vehement speech, which ruffled the temper of David R. Williams. Quincy
was defeated in the House; but the Senate by a vote of twenty-six to
four saved the rights of parents, guardians, and masters, without
reducing the age of enlistments. The bill became law December 12, and
was quickly followed by another bill raising the bounty and organizing
the recruiting service.
Before this matter was finished, the naval committee reported a bill
for increasing the navy; and the two Houses vied with one another in
their enthusiasm for this recently unpopular branch of the public
service. Here and there an old Republican protested that he could not
in conscience violate every fixed idea of his political existence by
voting for a large naval establishment; but when the House was asked
to appropriate money for four ships-of-the-line and six forty-four-gun
frigates, although the Federalists were much divided as to the wisdom
of building seventy-fours, and debated the subject at great length with
contradictory votes, the House closed the discussion, December 23, by
passing the bill as it stood. In the minority of fifty-six were several
warm friends of the navy, who thought Congress needlessly extravagant.
“Frigates and seventy-fours,” wrote Jefferson,[376] “are a sacrifice
we must make, heavy as it is, to the prejudices of a part of our
citizens.” No one who saw the quickness of this revolution could
doubt that whatever evils war might cause, it was a potent force
to sweep nations forward on their destined way of development or
decline. Madison, Monroe, Gallatin, as well as Jefferson and the whole
Republican party accepted a highly paid mercenary army, a fleet of
ships-of-the-line, a great national debt at high interest, and a war
of conquest in coincidence with the wars of Napoleon, on ground which
fifteen years before had been held by them insufficient to warrant
resistance to France.
More serious suggestions were offered by the failure of Congress to act
its intended part as the controlling branch of government. The founders
of the Constitution had not expected the legislative power whose wishes
the President was created to carry out, and which was alone responsible
for the policy of government, to prove imbecile; yet every one saw that
Congress was sinking, or had already sunk, low in efficiency. Before
the declaration of war, this condition of the Legislature was concealed
by the factiousness which caused it; but the first meeting of Congress
during the war disclosed one of the commonplaces of history,--that no
merely legislative body could control a single, concentrated Executive,
even though it were in hands as little enterprising as those of
President Madison. The declaration of war placed Congress in a new
position. Although the sessions were unchanged in character, they
became suddenly unimportant compared with Executive acts. Congress no
longer counteracted directly the Executive will, or refused what the
President required; the wishes expressed in his Annual Message were for
the first time carried out like orders. On the other hand the country
was excited by a reorganization of the Cabinet, and Congress seemed
to feel itself superfluous, while the President decided upon the
conflicting claims of politicians to act as channels for dispensing his
power.
The exceptions to the newly-established discipline were chiefly
found among the war leaders themselves, who had done most to make
it necessary. As the demands of the government became greater, they
interfered with favorite interests or prejudices. This was particularly
the case with the required financial measures. Gallatin made in
his annual report no direct recommendations; he contented himself
with a brief statement of receipts and estimates; but in a letter
to the Committee of Ways and Means, dated November 18, he suggested
a resource which might to the extent of a few millions relieve the
Treasury from its immediate burden. The resource was accidental.
Immediately after the repeal of the British Orders in Council, British
merchandise to a great amount was shipped to America in reliance on
the Act of Congress of March 2, 1811, which declared that the repeal
of the British Orders, at any time, should of itself put an end to the
American non-importation. The declaration of war, five days before
the British repeal, rendered inoperative the Act of March 2, 1811, so
that the importers became liable not only to capture by the public and
private armed vessels of both countries, but also to confiscation of
their property by the government on its arrival in the United States.
Both events occurred. Some vessels were captured at sea, and sent in;
but these and all the rest were alike seized on their arrival, and
libelled by the government without distinction. The question then
arose, what should be done with them.
Under the law of forfeiture, one half was vested in the custom-house
officers or informers, the other half in the United States; and the
power to remit, in whole or in part, was vested in the Secretary
of the Treasury. No one expected the government to exact the full
forfeiture, for the importations had been made in good faith, and the
property was chiefly American. As though to protect the owners the
courts interfered, and in certain districts compelled the collectors to
release the cargoes on receiving bonds to their appraised value. The
action of the courts obliged the President to make the rule general.
All the cargoes were released, the goods passed into the market, and
only bonds to the amount of near eighteen million dollars, besides
duties to the amount of five millions, remained in charge of the
Treasury. The five millions were safe; but the bonds were by no means
as good as the gold.
Gallatin expressed to the Committee of Ways and Means the opinion,
that in view of the extraordinary profits of the importers, who had
no right to any profit at all, substantial justice would be done by
remitting that half of the forfeitures which would otherwise fall to
the collectors, and by exacting for the public only an equivalent
for unexpected war profits. His plan aimed at placing the importers,
as nearly as possible, in the condition they had expected, on the
withdrawal of the non-importation, when they ordered the importations
to be made.[377]
Gallatin’s views were explained more fully in the course of the debate.
The importers had been aware of their risk, and had not taken it
without much hesitation, after consulting Jonathan Russell, then in
charge of the legation at London. The Government held non-importation
to be more effective than armies or fleets in bringing England to
terms, and the non-importation was still in force as a war measure.
Gallatin’s orders, which admitted these goods for sale, violated the
law and the policy of government; but if the goods had been admitted,
as was the case, at least they should not be used to diminish the
government’s receipts from internal taxation. The duties already levied
to the amount of five million dollars did not exceed twenty-five per
cent on their cost, while the goods themselves commanded war prices,
and no other goods of the same kind were allowed to enter the country.
The profits could hardly fail to be great, and no small part of these
profits, besides the invested capital, was British. Finally, within
the wider questions of equity, law, and policy remained the fact that
bankruptcy in one form or another stood directly before the Treasury,
and that four or five million dollars might be the means of national
salvation.
If objections were to be made, one might have supposed that Cheves,
Clay, and Calhoun would have resisted Gallatin’s idea because it
offered too much encouragement to mercantile speculation resting
on violation of law; but nothing was more uncertain than the moral
sensitiveness of a political body. What seemed to one statesman a
right and proper act seemed evident dishonesty to another; nor had
the science of ethics made sensible progress toward the invention of
practical tests. Statesmen who saw nothing improper in the seizure
of West Florida, the attacks on East Florida, or the campaign of
Tippecanoe; who maintained the doctrine that the admission of Louisiana
dissolved the Union, or that Champagny’s letters satisfied the demands
of government and the Acts of Congress,--war Democrats and Federalists
alike, representing the morality and the energy of the country, joined
in attacking Gallatin’s plan. Langdon Cheves, chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee, after reporting from the committee, November 25,
a resolution to leave the subject to the Secretary of the Treasury,
began a speech, December 4, by declaring that he trembled for the
consequences of the measure; it would shake the party to pieces; it
would make angels weep.
“I trust in God,” cried Cheves, “no man who may be thus
consigned by this House to the Secretary of the Treasury to
await his decision and to supplicate his clemency, will so
far forget what he owes to his own true interests and to his
character as a free citizen as to give an equivalent for that
sum of money which may be demanded as the government’s share of
the profits. I would rather see the objects of the war fail,--I
would rather see the seamen of the country impressed on the
ocean and our commerce swept from its bosom,--than see the long
arm of the Treasury indirectly thrust into the pocket of the
citizen through the medium of a penal law.”
Henry Clay admitted and favored total confiscation, but not the idea of
a compromise:--
“The law ought to be enforced or not. He thought a compromise
in the case dangerous and undignified; indeed, he felt shocked
at the idea of an equivalent. Already are our laws too openly
violated or fraudulently eluded. Shall we degrade them still
further by carrying them into the market and fixing a price
upon their violation? Extend the principle of an equivalent,
from cases of prohibition merely, to instances of moral
turpitude,--to felony and homicide,--and every gentleman will
see its enormity. No, sir! Let us not pollute our hands with
this welt-gild!”
Calhoun would not allow that the government could properly act at all:--
“If our merchants are innocent,” he said, “they are welcome to
their good fortune; if guilty, I scorn to participate in its
profits. I will never consent to make our penal code the basis
of our Ways and Means, or to establish a partnership between the
Treasury and the violators of the Non-importation Law.”
William Lowndes fortified his position by an argument showing that
“if the plan of confiscation and of a rigid execution of the law were
dismissed, no just principles of policy and not even the interests
of the Treasury could sanction an exaction which would resolve itself
into a tax.” Josiah Quincy found himself for once in accord with his
chief opponents, and declared that in his opinion highway robbery stood
a little higher in point of courage, and was a little less in point
of iniquity, than this Treasury attempt to make calumny the basis
of plunder. Felix Grundy said: “Gentlemen have assumed a strange,
high-minded position in this argument, the force of which, I confess,
is beyond my comprehension.”
December 11 the House in Committee of the Whole, by a vote of fifty-two
to forty-nine, rejected Gallatin’s suggestion. December 15 a bill came
from the Senate remitting all forfeitures on goods owned by Americans
and shipped from England before September 15, when the declaration of
war became known there. After a sharp debate this bill passed by a vote
of sixty-four to sixty-one,--Calhoun, Cheves, and Lowndes voting with
the Federalists and securing its passage. This decision closed one
source of revenue for the year.
The course taken by Cheves, Calhoun, and Lowndes was largely due to
their dislike of the non-importation system on which the proposed
forfeiture rested. They wished to abolish commercial restrictions; they
were anxious to avoid internal taxation, and to supply the Treasury
with revenue by admitting British goods under heavy duties. So earnest
was Cheves in pursuit of this object that he hardly tolerated any
other, and made no secret of his hope that the failure to exact these
forfeitures and to lay internal taxes would compel Congress to depend
upon imports for resources.
“How are the exigencies of the government for the next year
to be supplied?” he asked as early as December 4. “Is the
deficiency to be derived from [internal] taxes? No! I will tell
gentlemen who are opposed to them, for their comfort, that there
will be no taxes imposed for the next year. It was said last
session that you would have time to lay them for this session,
but I then said it was a mistake. You now find this to be the
fact. By your indecision then, when the country was convinced
they were necessary, you have set the minds of the people
against taxes; but were it otherwise, you have not time now to
lay them for next year.”
Calhoun also laid down emphatic principles on this point, dwelling in
strong language on what he held to be the radical error of Virginia
statesmanship.
“At the end of the last session,” said Calhoun, December 8, “I
recommended high duties as a substitute for the Non-importation
Act. High duties have no pernicious effects, and are consistent
with the genius of the people and the institutions of the
country. It is thus we would combine in the highest degree
the active resources of the country with the pressure on the
manufactures of the enemy. Your army and navy would feel the
animating effect.... The non-importation as a redress of wrongs
is radically defective. You may meet commercial restrictions
with commercial restrictions, but you cannot safely confront
premeditated insult and injury with commercial restrictions
alone.... It sinks the nation in its own estimation; it
counts for nothing what is ultimately connected with our best
hopes,--the Union of these States. Our Union cannot safely
stand on the cold calculation of interest alone; it is too
weak to withstand political convulsions; we cannot without
hazard neglect that which makes man love to be a member of an
extensive community,--the love of greatness, the consciousness
of strength.”
The three South Carolinians--Calhoun, Cheves, and Lowndes--had a
financial policy of their own, in which they received some private
sympathy, if not much active support, from the Treasury. Gallatin, in
his own way, stood in a position almost as solitary as that of John
Randolph; but condemned as he was to support the burden of a war which
Congress had insisted upon, with only such financial means as Congress
left him, he could feel little sympathy with any financial scheme,
for all were more or less clumsy and inefficient. As far as he could
see, nothing but peace could save the Treasury. In June, at the time
of declaring war, he urged taxation; but the party feared taxation,
and preferred to wait the chances of military success. In December
these expected successes turned into disasters; the country showed
an unforeseen hostility to the war. Taxation might easily be fatal,
for the war found little real support except in Kentucky, Tennessee,
and the Southern States, precisely where internal taxation would
excite deepest resistance. The war leaders would not hear of laying
taxes at such a moment, and they had no great difficulty in carrying
their point. Gallatin himself could afford to wait. The accidental
importations from England after the repeal of the British orders
brought five million dollars into the Treasury,--a sum so much greater
than had been expected, and so ample for meeting the interest on old
and new loans, that Gallatin could not think himself obliged to exhaust
his influence and risk that of his party in order to wring taxes from
a timid Congress. The secretary’s attitude brought upon him a fair and
just rebuke from John Randolph, that he had trifled with the dignity
of the House.[378] Had Gallatin been inclined to retort, he would have
replied that so far as the Treasury knew, the House had no dignity
to trifle with; but Gallatin never lost control of his temper or his
tongue, and after having been the readiest and boldest adviser of his
party he had become a master in the art of silence. He expressed once
more his belief in the necessity of taxation;[379] but this done he let
Congress go its own gait.
Cheves aspired to abolish the remains of Jeffersonian
statesmanship,--non-importations, embargoes, and restrictions,--and
to restore the freedom of commerce; and in support of this scheme he
obtained from Gallatin a letter dated Feb. 9, 1813,[380] expressing
the decided opinion that Congress must not only impose war taxes, both
external and internal, but must also repeal the non-importation, if the
increased expenditures authorized by law were to be met. February 15
Cheves introduced a bill carrying out the secretary’s opinion so far
as to suspend the Non-importation Act in part, though continuing it
against articles specially enumerated. Two days afterward the House,
by a vote of sixty-nine to forty-seven, instructed the Committee of
Ways and Means to report tax-bills, although Cheves complained that
the instruction was deceptive, and that no system of taxation could
possibly be adopted within the fortnight that remained of the session.
Apparently Cheves looked on the motion as a manœuvre to save the
Non-importation Act; but he could hardly have been prepared to see
the Federalist member, Elisha Potter of Rhode Island, rise, February
20, and declare that his constituents had invested a capital of four
or five million dollars in manufactures protected by non-importation,
and that Cheves’s bill, sacrificing as it did the interests of the
manufacturing States, ought not to pass.
Such a change of attitude foreshadowed a revolution. New England had
her price. The system which Jefferson forced upon her at the cost of
the Southern States had begun to work its intended effect. Under the
pressure of Virginia legislation, New England was abandoning commerce
and creating manufactures. While every Federalist newspaper in the
country denounced the restrictive system without ceasing, nearly every
Federalist in the House voted with Potter in its favor. By seventy-nine
votes to twenty-four, the Committee of the Whole struck out Cheves’s
proposed relaxation, and converted his bill into a measure for the
stricter enforcement of non-importation. Cheves and Lowndes were then
obliged to vote against their own bill, so amended, in a minority of
forty-five to sixty-seven.
Nothing remained but to depend upon loans and call an extra session
to consider the taxes. The loan bill, passed January 26, authorized
the President to borrow sixteen million dollars on any terms he could
obtain, provided only that the nominal capital might be repaid at
the end of twelve years. Attempts to limit the rates of interest and
discount were defeated, and the bill passed by a vote of seventy-five
to thirty-eight. Another bill immediately followed, authorizing the
issue of treasury notes bearing interest at five and two fifths per
cent, to be redeemed in one year. Five millions in such notes were
to be issued at all events, and five millions more in case the loan
should prove less advantageous than the notes. By these means Congress
proposed to supply the needed twenty-one million dollars, although no
one could say with confidence how much these millions would cost, or
whether they could be obtained at any price.
There ended the financial work of the session. The military and
naval results were more considerable. Besides the Act increasing the
soldiers’ pay to eight dollars a month, Congress authorized the
President to raise twenty new regiments of infantry for one year’s
service, with full pay, bounty of sixteen dollars, and invalid pensions
of five dollars a month. Six new major-generals and an equal number
of brigadiers were authorized February 24; the departments of the
commissary and quartermaster-general were placed on a better footing;
the general staff was organized with comparative liberality,--until,
March 3, 1813, the last day of Madison’s first term, the President,
who had begun his career of power in an Administration which in effect
abolished army and navy, commanded a regular force consisting by law of
fifty-eight thousand men,[381] and was surrounded by major-generals and
brigadiers by the dozen, instead of the solitary brigadier Wilkinson
who had been left to command the frontier garrisons of 1801, while four
ships-of-the-line, six forty-fours, and six sloops-of-war were building
to reinforce the six frigates and the rest of the navy actually in
service; and in addition to all this, an unlimited order had been
issued for flotillas on the lakes.
With each new Act, John Randolph showed how his old friends were giving
the lie to their old political professions; but by common consent party
consistency was admitted to be no longer capable of defence. The party
which had taken power in 1801 to carry out the principle that the hopes
of society and the rights of the States must not be risked by war for
points of pride or profits of commerce, declared with equal energy in
1812 that the country had no choice but to sacrifice hopes and rights
because England would not expressly abandon a point of pride. Doubtless
this momentary position was far beyond the conscious convictions of the
party, but it made a precedent; and although political parties were apt
to think that precedents could be ignored, history seldom failed to
show that they decided the course of law. As far as concerned the old
Republican party, the triumph of the national movement was for the time
complete.
Yet the government was not so rigid in its logic, even in regard to
municipal legislation, as it professed to be. If the dispute about
impressment was to be settled, it must be settled by a general consent
to abandon the practice. Whether governments consented expressly or
tacitly, by a preliminary agreement, by treaty, by legislation, or by
simply ceasing to impress, was a matter of little concern provided
the practice was stopped. The United States were not obliged to wage
war on England or France merely because, under old international law,
those governments claimed what they called a right to seize their
subjects on the high seas. Indeed, the cause of war would not have
been removed by an express surrender of impressment on the high seas,
though it had been accompanied by an equally express surrender of
the right of search. The difficulty lay deeper and extended further
than the American flag had ability to go. Much the larger number of
impressments took place on shore or within British waters. Many of the
American seamen for whose sake the war continued to be fought were
American only in the sense that they carried American papers. They were
British-born, in British service, and were impressed in the grog-shops
of London or Liverpool. The American government could hardly concede
to its seamen the liberty refused to its ships,--of carrying double
sets of papers, and appearing as American or British at will; yet if
the American protection had legal meaning, it entitled the seaman to
complete immunity, no matter where he might be, or might have been
in the past, or might intend to be in the future, even though he had
never been in the United States in his life. The British officer could
not be allowed to disregard the protection, even though such a system
would make seamen a privileged class, with double nationality and no
allegiance.
Annoyed by this insuperable obstacle to an arrangement, Monroe offered
the British government to prohibit by Act of Congress the employment
of British seamen in the public or private marine of the United
States.[382] The offer was meant as an inducement for England to
sacrifice her seamen already naturalized in America, on the chance of
recovering those who might not carry American papers; but it bore to
England the look of an evasion, and was received by Lord Castlereagh
in that sense.[383] The subject had reached this stage when it was
brought before Congress by the President’s Annual Message, and was
referred by the House to the Committee of Foreign Relations. January 29
Felix Grundy made a report from the committee,[384] doubtless written
in concert with Monroe and intended to support his position, since it
approved what the secretary had done and gave authority to his views.
The report asserted with emphasis that impressment alone prevented an
armistice. More than once, as though this were the weak point of the
government’s situation, Grundy returned to the theme that impressment
“must be provided for in the negotiation; the omission of it in a
treaty of peace would not leave it on its former grounds,--it would in
effect be an absolute relinquishment.”
The danger of thus committing the government to a _sine qua non_
which might need to be abandoned was becoming more evident every day,
for already Napoleon was known to have suffered some great disaster in
Russia, and his power in Spain was evidently threatened with overthrow.
After Napoleon should have been routed in Russia and Spain, and the
American armies should have abandoned the hope of conquering Canada,
the chance of driving England into an express surrender of impressments
would vanish. Wisdom dictated caution; but Monroe’s letters and
Grundy’s report, while committing the government to a _sine qua
non_ preliminary to negotiation, proposed to escape the inevitable
difficulty by an expedient less dignified than the country had a right
to expect. Grundy reported a bill to serve as the groundwork for peace.
This bill began by a prospective, reciprocal prohibition, “from and
after the termination of a treaty of peace,” to employ on any vessel,
public or private, any but actual citizens, “or persons who being
resident within the United States at the time of such treaty, and
having previously declared agreeably to existing laws their intention
to become citizens of the United States, shall be admitted as such
within five years thereafter in the manner prescribed by law.” With
these exceptions, Congress was to dismiss all foreign seamen from
the American service, and to forbid forever the sea as a livelihood
to persons coming into the country with the intention of acquiring
citizenship, after the treaty of peace.
The objections to this measure were evident. It seemed tacitly to admit
the right of impressment; it denied to one class of citizens rights in
which all others were protected, and its Constitutionality was at least
doubtful; it trenched on Executive functions and the treaty-making
power; it placed American merchants under great disadvantages,
depriving them of seamen, and under many circumstances making it
impossible for an American ship to return from a distant port. Yet
perhaps its worst practical fault consisted in pressing upon England,
as an ultimatum, terms of peace which she had again and again rejected
and was certain to reject. Indeed, the only argument of weight advanced
in favor of the bill was that its rejection by England would heal the
divisions of America. Unfortunately, even this argument seemed to have
little foundation.
The bill passed the House by a vote of eighty-nine to thirty-three, and
February 12 went to the Senate. There Giles took it in hand, and after
sharp opposition it was amended and passed, February 27, by a vote of
eighteen to twelve. In its adopted form the Act did not contain the
clause that roused most opposition, but reached the same result in a
less direct way:--
“From and after the termination of the war,” ran the new
statute, “it shall not be lawful to employ on board any of the
public or private vessels of the United States any person or
persons except citizens of the United States, or persons of
color, natives of the United States.... No person who shall
arrive in the United States from and after the time when this
Act shall take effect shall be admitted to become a citizen of
the United States who shall not for the continued term of five
years next preceding his admission as aforesaid have resided
within the United States, without being at any time within the
said five years out of the territory of the United States.”
The subject of impressment was so difficult to understand, even in its
simpler facts, that the practical workings of this measure could not
be foreseen. No one knew how many naturalized British seamen were
in the American service, or how many British seamen not naturalized;
and there was no sufficient evidence to serve as the foundation for a
probable guess as to the number of impressments from American ships, or
how they were distributed among the three classes,--(1) native American
citizens; (2) naturalized British seamen; and (3) seamen avowedly
British subjects. According to a report made from the Department of
State, Feb. 18, 1813,[385] the supposed number of seamen registered
in the United States since 1796 amounted to about one hundred and
forty thousand. The actual number in any one year was unknown. In
1805 Gallatin estimated them, from the registered tonnage, at fifty
thousand.[386]
Foreign seamen served chiefly in the foreign trade; and since the
registered tonnage in foreign trade increased from 750,000 tons
in 1805 to 984,000 tons in 1810, the number of seamen increased
proportionately from 45,000 to 60,000 or thereabout. In 1807 Gallatin
estimated the increase at five thousand a year, more than half being
British sailors.[387] Probably fifteen thousand seamen, or one fourth
of the whole number employed in 1810,[388] were of foreign origin, and
might or might not carry American papers. If they did not, the reason
could only be that they knew the worthlessness of such papers. Genuine
American protections could be bought in any large port for two dollars
apiece, while forged protections were to be had by the gross.[389] A
large proportion of the British seamen in American service carried no
evidence of American citizenship.
According to Lord Castlereagh’s statement in Parliament, the number
of seamen claiming to be Americans in the British service amounted
to three thousand five hundred in January, 1811, and to something
more than three thousand in February, 1813, at the time he was
speaking.[390] Of these, he said, only about one in four, or some
eight hundred, could offer proof of any sort, good or bad, of their
citizenship; the others had no evidence either of birth or of
naturalization in America. If this was true, and the closest American
calculation seemed rather to favor Castlereagh’s assertion, the new Act
of Congress sacrificed much to obtain little; for it authorized the
President to expel from American service five or ten thousand seamen,
and to forbid future employment or naturalization to all British
seamen, if England in return would cease to employ five or six hundred
impressed Americans.
The concession was immense, not only in its effect on legitimate
American commerce and shipping, but also on the national character.
America possessed certainly the right, which England had always
exercised, of naturalizing foreign seamen in her service, and still
more of employing such seamen without naturalization. In denying
herself the practice she made a sacrifice much greater in material
cost, and certainly not less in national character, than she ever
made by tolerating impressments under protest. The impressments cost
her about five hundred seamen a year, of whom only a fraction were
citizens; of these such as were natives could in most cases obtain
release on giving evidence of their citizenship, while five times
the number of native British seamen annually deserted the British
service for the American. Thus England was much the greater sufferer
from the situation; and America preserved her rights by never for an
instant admitting the British doctrine of impressment, and by retaining
the ability to enforce at any moment her protest by war. All these
advantages were lost by Monroe’s new scheme. Under the Act of 1813
America would save her citizens to whatever number they amounted, but
she would do so by sacrificing her shipping, by abandoning the practice
if not the right of employing and naturalizing British seamen, and by
tacitly admitting the right of impressment so far as to surrender the
use of undoubted national rights as an equivalent for it.
Numbers of leading Republicans denounced the measure as feeble,
mischievous, and unconstitutional. Only as an electioneering argument
against the extreme Federalists, and as a means of satisfying
discontented Republicans, was it likely to serve any good purpose; but
the dangers of discord and the general apathy toward the war had become
so evident as to make some concession necessary,--and thus it happened
that with general approval the law received the President’s signature,
and the next day the Twelfth Congress expired. With it expired
President Madison’s first term of office, leaving the country more than
ever distracted, and as little able to negotiate as to conquer.
INDEX TO VOLS. I. AND II.
Act of Congress, of Jane 28, 1809, restoring intercourse with Great
Britain, i. 80;
of June 28, 1809, suspending the recruiting service, 85;
of June 28, 1809, reducing the naval establishment, 85;
of March 1, 1810, concerning the commercial intercourse between
the United States and Great Britain and France, 194–198 (see
Non-intercourse);
of Feb 14, 1810, appropriating sixty thousand dollars for the
Cumberland Road, 209;
of March 26, 1810, providing for the Third Census, 209;
of March 30, 1810, appropriating five thousand dollars for
experiments on the submarine torpedo, 209;
of Feb. 20, 1811, admitting the State of Louisiana into the
Union, 326;
of Jan. 15, 1811, authorizing the occupation of East Florida,
327;
of March 2, 1811, reviving non-intercourse against Great Britain,
338–354 (see Non-intercourse);
of Jan. 11, 1812, to raise an additional military force of
twenty-five thousand men, ii. 147, 153;
of Feb. 6, 1812, to accept volunteers, 159–161;
of March 14, 1812, authorizing a loan for eleven million dollars,
169;
of April 4, 1812, laying an embargo for ninety days, 201, 202,
203;
of April 8, 1812, admitting the State of Louisiana into the
Union, 235;
of April 10, 1812, authorizing a call for one hundred thousand
militia, 204;
of June 18, 1812, declaring war against Great Britain, 228, 229;
of July 1, 1812, doubling the duties on imports, 235;
of Dec. 12, 1812, increasing the pay of the army, 435;
of Jan. 20, 1813, increasing the bounty for recruits, 436;
of Jan. 2, 1813, for building four seventy-fours and six
frigates, 436;
of Jan. 5, 1813, remitting fines, forfeitures, etc., 443;
of Feb. 8, 1813, authorizing loan of sixteen millions, 448;
of Feb. 25, 1813, authorizing the issue of Treasury notes for
five millions, 448;
of Jan. 29, 1813, for raising twenty regiments for one year, 449;
of Feb. 24, 1813, for appointing six major-generals and six
brigadiers, 449;
of March 3, 1813, to provide for the supplies of the army, 449;
of March 3, 1813, for the better organization of the general
staff, 449;
of March 3, 1813, for building six sloops-of-war, 449;
of March 3, 1813, for the regulation of seamen on board the
public and private vessels of the United States, 453–458.
Act of the territorial legislature of Indiana, permitting the
introduction of slaves, ii. 76.
Adams, President, expenditures of his administration, i. 200, 205,
206.
Adams, John Quincy, nominated as minister to Russia, i. 11;
renominated and confirmed, 86;
nominated and confirmed Justice of the Supreme Court, 360;
sails for Russia, 408;
arrives, 409;
his negotiations in 1809, 409, 411;
his negotiations in 1810, 412–418;
his success, 419, 420, 422.
“Adams,” brig, launched at Detroit, ii. 304;
captured and recaptured, 347;
destroyed, 347.
“Adams,” 28-gun frigate, ii. 364.
“Aeolus,” case of, ii. 273.
“Aeolus,” British frigate, ii. 368.
“Africa,” British frigate, ii. 368.
Albany, headquarters of Dearborn, ii. 304, 305, 308, 309, 310.
“Alert,” British sloop-of-war, her action with the “Essex,” ii. 35,
377.
Alexander, Czar of Russia, with Napoleon at Erfurt, i. 23;
his alliance with Napoleon, 134, 257;
his approaching rupture with Napoleon, 385, 408–424;
interferes for American commerce in Denmark, 410, 411;
his reply to Napoleon’s demands, 413, 414;
gives special orders to release American ships, 415;
his attachment to the United States, 415;
his ukase on foreign trade, 418.
Amelia Island, i. 165.
Anderson, Joseph, senator from Tennessee, defeats mission to
Russia, i. 12;
criticises Giles, ii. 150;
chairman of committee on declaration of war, 228.
“Argus,” sloop-of-war, ii. 363, 364, 378, 381.
Armistice between Dearborn and Prevost, ii. 322, 323, 324, 404;
known to Brock, 330;
disavowed by Madison, 340, 404;
an advantage to Dearborn, 343;
proposed by Monroe, 403;
proposed by Admiral Warren, 416.
Armstrong, John, minister in Paris, his discontent, i. 28;
his relations with Roumanzoff, 29;
his complaints in 1809, 39;
communicates Non-intercourse Act of March 1, 1809, 135, 235;
his comments on the right of search, 145;
his interview with King Louis of Holland, 147, 148;
his despatch on Fouché and Montalivet, 224;
on Napoleon’s motives, 225;
his minute for a treaty, 228;
his recall asked by Napoleon, 228, 229, 252;
his remonstrance against the doctrine of retaliation, 233, 234;
his report of Jan. 10, 1810, 238;
inquires condition of revoking decrees, 251;
communicates Non-intercourse Act of May 1, 1810, 252;
his reception of Cadore’s letter of Aug. 5, 1810, 259, 260;
returns to America, 260, 261, 381;
declares Napoleon’s conditions to be not precedent, 261;
silent about indemnity, 260, 296;
Virginian jealousy of, 370;
on Napoleon’s designs on the Baltic, 417;
becomes brigadier-general, ii. 427;
his attitude towards Monroe and Madison, 426, 427;
nominated Secretary of War, 428;
his character, 428.
Army, in 1809, i. 169;
described by Wilkinson, 170, 171;
encamped at Terre aux Bœufs, 171–175;
reductions in 1810, 200–207;
raised by law to thirty-five thousand men, ii. 148, 151–153;
useless, 165;
condition of, 289, 292;
recruiting for, 294;
war establishment in 1812, 295;
enlistments in, 337, 390, 391, 401;
difficulty of filling, 394;
Acts of Congress for filling ranks of, 435, 436;
war establishment in 1813, 449. (See Infantry.)
“Asia,” American ship, burned by French squadron, ii. 193, 198.
Astor, John Jacob, ii. 301.
Austria, i. 27, 134;
fights battles of Essling and Wagram, 106.
Bacon, Ezekiel, member of Congress from Massachusetts, ii. 156;
votes against frigates, 164;
moves war taxes, 165, 166.
Baen, William C., captain of Fourth U. S. Infantry, killed at
Tippecanoe, ii. 104.
Bainbridge, William, captain in U. S. navy, ii. 384;
takes command of the “Constitution,” 384;
captures “Java,” 385, 386.
Baltimore, population in 1810, i. 289.
Baltimore riot, July 27, 1812, ii. 406–409.
Bank of the United States, i. 167;
bill introduced for rechartering, 207, 208;
hostile influence of State Banks, 327, 330, 332, 335, 336;
pretexts for opposition to charter of, 328, 329;
necessity for, 329;
Crawford’s bill for rechartering, 332;
debate on, 332–336;
defeat of, 337.
Banks, popularity of, ii. 208, 209.
Baring, Alexander, ii. 276.
Barlow, Joel, on Robert Smith’s appointment, i. 10;
on Smith’s opposition to Macon’s bill, 187;
his defence of the President, 299, 301, 378;
appointed minister to France, 359;
his instructions on revocation of French Decrees, 427;
his departure delayed by Monroe, ii. 50;
ready to start, 55;
order for his departure countermanded, 56;
order finally given, 61;
his instructions, 66;
his want of success, 217;
arrives in Paris, Sept. 19, 1811, 245;
his negotiation with Bassano, 248–263;
his journey to Wilna, 263, 264;
his death, 265.
Bassano, Duc de. (See Maret.)
Bassett, Burwell, member of Congress from Virginia, i. 206.
Bathurst, Lord, on the Orders in Council, ii. 275.
Baton Rouge, i. 306.
Bayard, James A., senator from Delaware, ii. 229.
Baynes, Edward, adjutant-general to Sir George Prevost, ii. 323.
Bayonne Decree. (See Decrees.)
Belden, Lieutenant, ii. 32.
“Belvidera,” British frigate, blockading New York, ii. 364, 365;
escapes from Rodgers’ squadron, 366;
chases “Constitution,” 368, 370.
Bernadotte. (See Sweden.)
Bibb, William A., member of Congress from Georgia, on the
annexation of West Florida to Louisiana, i. 324.
Bidwell, Barnabas, i. 359.
Bingham, A. B., captain of the British corvette “Little Belt,” his
account of his action with the “President,” ii. 30, 31, 33–36.
Bleecker, Harmanus, member of Congress from New York, ii. 211.
Blockade, Napoleon’s definition of, i. 149, 227, 250;
Pinkney’s definition of, 287; ii. 10;
of April 26, 1809, by England of all ports and places under the
government of France, i. 63, 64, 103, 277;
of May 16, 1806, (Fox’s) 277;
Wellesley’s conduct regarding, 278–280, 318;
withdrawal required by Madison, 318, 383;
withdrawal demanded by Pinkney, ii. 4, 5, 17;
reply of England to demand of withdrawal, 6, 9, 15, 23;
becomes the only apparent _casus belli_, 221;
alleged by Madison as the third _casus belli_, 222;
of Venice, July 27, 1806, i. 279;
of New York, ii. 25, 118, 222.
Bloomfield, Joseph, brigadier general, ii. 291;
at Plattsburg, 359, 360.
“Bonne Citoyenne,” British sloop-of-war, ii. 384.
Boston, reception of F. J. Jackson, in, i. 214, 216;
population in 1810, 289.
Boston town-meeting on Baltimore riot, ii. 409.
Boyd, Adam, member of Congress from New Jersey, i. 206.
Boyd, John P., colonel of Fourth U. S. Infantry, ii. 92, 93;
arrives at Vincennes, 94. (See Infantry.)
Bradley, Stephen R., senator from Vermont, votes against occupying
East Florida, ii. 243.
Brazil, i. 46.
Brock, Isaac, governor of Upper Canada, ii. 316;
his military precautions, 317;
his military force, 317;
his civil difficulties, 318, 319;
orders expedition to Mackinaw, 320;
his proclamation, 320;
dismisses his legislature, 320;
passes Long Point, 321, 322;
arrives at Malden, 329;
decides to cross the Detroit River, 330;
his march on Detroit, 332;
returns to Niagara, 341;
his military wishes, 342;
distressed by loss of vessels, 347;
his force at Niagara, 348;
surprised on Queenston Heights, 349;
his death, 350.
Broke, P. B. V., captain of British frigate “Shannon,” commands
squadron, ii. 368, 369;
chases “Constitution,” 370, 371.
Brougham, Henry, organizes agitation against Orders in Council, ii.
271, 280, 283;
his speech of March 3, 1812, 276;
obliges ministers to grant a committee of inquiry, 283–285;
moves repeal, 285.
Burr, Aaron, his memoir to Napoleon, i. 239.
Burwell, William A., member of Congress from Virginia, on reducing
the army and navy in 1810, i. 202.
Cabinet. (See Robert Smith, James Monroe, Albert Gallatin, William
Eustis, John Armstrong, Paul Hamilton, William Jones, Cæsar A.
Rodney, William Pinkney.)
Cadore, Duc de. (See Champagny.)
“Caledonia,” 2-gun British brig, captured by Lieutenant Elliott,
ii. 347.
Calhoun, John Caldwell, member of Congress from South Carolina, ii.
122;
on Committee of Foreign Relations, 124, 128;
his war-speech of Dec. 12, 1811, 143, 144;
votes for frigates, 164;
warns Quincy of the embargo, 201;
on the conquest of Canada, 212;
his war-report, 226;
his bill declaring war, 228;
his speech of June 24, 1812, against the restrictive system, 233;
favors war-taxation, 235;
opposes compromise of forfeitures under Non-importation Act, 442;
favors high import duties, 444.
Campbell, George Washington, member of Congress from Tennessee, his
Report reaches Canning, i. 49;
not a member of the Eleventh Congress, 76;
senator from Tennessee, his criticism of Giles, ii. 150, 151.
Canada, intended conquest of, ii. 136, 141, 142, 145, 146, 150,
212;
invasion planned at Washington, 297;
ordered by Eustis, 302;
conquest attempted by Hull, 296;
invaded by Hull, 302;
evacuated, 315;
difficulties of defending, 316–319;
extent of Upper, 316;
military force in 1812, 317, 338;
Jefferson and Madison on campaign in, 337;
invasion of, at Niagara, 344, 345;
Van Rensselaer’s attack on, 346–353;
Smyth’s attempts against, 354–358;
Dearborn’s march to, 360.
Canning, George, his reply to Napoleon and Alexander, i. 23;
his notice to Pinkney of possible change in the Orders, 42;
his note of Dec. 24, 1808, announcing a change, 43;
his anger at Pinkney’s reply, 44, 45;
his willingness for further relaxations, 45;
his discontent with Castlereagh and Perceval, 48, 106;
his reception of Erskine’s despatches and Campbell’s Report, 49,
50, 51;
his assertion as to the cause of the embargo, 51;
his instructions to Erskine of Jan. 23, 1809, 52–57, 66, 70–73,
90;
his character, 56;
his influence declining, 57, 58;
his speech of March 6, 1809, on the Orders, 61;
his remark to Pinkney on the Order of April 26, 64;
his disavowal of Erskine’s arrangement, 87–95;
his statement to the House of Commons, 97, 98;
his instructions to F. J. Jackson, July 1, 1809, 98–105;
his charge of duplicity against Madison, 99, 100, 114, 125;
his resignation, 107;
his duel with Castlereagh, 107;
his relations with Wellesley, 266, 267;
his speech on the renewal of intercourse between the United
States and Great Britain, 276;
his speech of March 3, 1812, on the Orders in Council and li
censes, ii. 277, 278.
Carden, J. S., captain of the British frigate “Macedonian,” ii.
382, 383.
Cass, Lewis, colonel of Ohio militia, ii. 298;
refuses to abandon Detroit, 315;
his discontent with Hull, 326;
detached to open an interior road to the river Raisin, 328;
ordered to return, 329;
included in Hull’s capitulation, 334.
Castlereagh, Lord, his supposed failures as Secretary of War, i.
47, 48, 106, 107;
retires from the cabinet, 107;
his quarrel with Canning, 56, 57;
his duel with Canning, 107;
becomes foreign Secretary, ii. 216;
his instructions to Foster of April 10, 1812, 216, 220;
announces suspension of Orders in Council, 286;
his statement of number of American seamen in British service,
456.
Caulaincourt, Duc de Vicence, French ambassador in Russia, i. 412;
recalled, 418;
congratulates Adams, 419.
Census of 1810, i. 289.
Champagny, Duc de Cadore, his instructions to Turreau in defence of
the Decrees, Dec. 10, 1808, i. 31;
in defence of the Spanish colonies, 33;
his remonstrances to Napoleon against severity to the United
States, 138, 139;
complains of the Non-intercourse Act, 140;
his instructions to Hauterive, June 13, 1809, on concessions to
the United States, 140;
his note on the right of search and blockade, 149, 150, 250;
his efforts on behalf of neutral commerce, 222;
his interview with Armstrong, Jan. 25, 1810, 229, 230;
his note of Feb. 14, 1810, announcing reprisals for the
Non-intercourse Act, 232;
his letter of August 5, 1810, announcing that the Decrees are
revoked, 253–256, 286, 296–302, 383, 414, 415; ii. 7;
creates a contract by letter of August 5, i. 342;
his report on the Decrees, 348, 349, 382, 388; ii. 8;
his phrase _bien entendu_, 387, 388;
declares the Decrees revoked on Feb. 2, 1811, 386, 389, 390;
removed from office, 401.
Champlain, Lake. (See Plattsburg.)
Chauncey, Isaac, takes command on Lake Ontario, ii. 344.
“Chesapeake Affair,” Canning’s instructions of Jan. 23, 1809, for
settling, i. 52, 53;
Erskine’s settlement of the, 67, 68;
settlement disavowed, 88–90;
Canning’s instructions of July 1, 1809, for settling, 101;
Jackson’s offer to settle, 126, 130;
untouched by Wellesley, 285;
Foster’s instructions to settle, ii. 23;
American indifference to settlement, 37;
its effect on the Indians, 79;
settled by Foster, 121, 122, 270.
“Chesapeake,” frigate, ii. 29, 36.
Cheves, Langdon, member of Congress from South Carolina, asserts
contract with Napoleon, i. 342, 343;
in the Twelfth Congress, ii. 122;
chairman of naval committee, 124;
on Committee on Ways and Means, 124;
his opinion on the war-power, 160;
his motion to build a navy, 162;
his argument in favor of seventy-fours, 163;
his hostility to non-importation, 205, 230, 232, 446, 447, 448;
favors war-taxation, 235;
opposes forfeitures under Non-importation Act, 441;
on war-taxes, 444.
Chew, Captain Samuel, deposition of, ii. 193, 196.
Chicago. (See Dearborn, Fort.)
Christie, John, lieut.-colonel of Thirteenth Infantry, ii. 349,
350, 351.
Cintra, convention of, i. 48.
Claiborne, W. C. C., governor of Orleans Territory, takes
possession of West Florida, i. 310–314.
Clay, Henry, senator from Kentucky, his war-speech of Feb. 22,
1810, i. 189;
his speech on the occupation of West Florida, 320, 321;
his speech on the Bank Charter, 333, 334;
elected speaker, ii. 122, 124;
favors army of thirty-five thousand men, 151;
favors war-power, 161;
favors navy, 164;
supposed to have coerced Madison to war, 196;
urges embargo, 201;
suppresses discussion in the House, 227;
his vote defeats repeal of non-importation, 234;
his account of the military efforts of Kentucky, 390–393;
his comments on Hull’s surrender, 392, 393;
opposes compromise of forfeitures under Non-importation Act, 442.
Clinton, De Witt, nominated for the presidency by New York, ii.
215;
his canvass, 409, 410;
his electoral vote, 413.
Clinton, George, Vice-President of the United States, i. 76, 190;
his vote against the Bank Charter, 337;
his political capacity, 363, 364;
his death, ii. 214.
Commerce, nature and value of American, i. 290, 291.
Commercial Intercourse, Act of May 1, 1810, regarding. (See
Non-intercourse.)
Commercial restrictions, list of measures of, i. 152, 194;
Madison’s devotion to, 293, 295;
Madison’s return to, 304.
Congress, first session of Eleventh, meets, May 22, 1809, i. 76;
proceedings of, 77–86;
adjourns June 28, 86;
second session meets, Nov. 27, 1809, 176;
proceedings of, 178–209;
adjourns, May 2, 1810, 209;
character of, 316;
election of Twelfth, 316;
third session of Eleventh, 319–358;
close of Eleventh, 358;
first session of Twelfth, meets Nov. 4, 1811, ii. 118;
its composition, 122;
chooses Henry Clay speaker, 124;
war-debate in, 133–153;
proceedings of, 133–175, 201, 202, 204;
declares war against England, 228, 229;
adjourns, July 6, 1812, 235;
decline of influence, 437;
second session of Twelfth, 435–458.
“Congress,” 38-gun frigate, ii. 363;
at Boston, 378;
her cruise, 381.
“Constellation,” 38-gun frigate, at Washington, ii. 364, 372, 378.
“Constitution,” 44-gun frigate, chased by British squadron, ii.
364, 369–372;
captures “Guerriere,” 373–375;
captures “Java,” 385, 386.
Cotton, manufacturers of, i. 16;
American, prohibited in France, 151.
Craig, Sir James, governor of Lower Canada, i. 86.
Crawford, William H., senator from Georgia, opposes mission to
Russia, i. 12;
on the message of Jan. 3, 1810, 179;
represents the Treasury, 181;
votes with Samuel Smith, 191;
his character, 331;
introduces Bank Charter, 332;
his speech on Bank Charter, 332, 333;
reports bill for fifty thousand volunteers, 358;
party to revolutionizing East Florida, ii. 239;
his comments on the conduct of the war, 395.
Creek Indians, Tecumthe visits, ii. 92, 108.
Crillon, Count Edward de, his family, ii. 176;
acts as John Henry’s agent, 177–179;
his social success, 178, 180;
his evidence, 183;
sails for France, 184;
an impostor, 185;
an agent of French police, 186.
Croker, John Wilson, Secretary to the Admiralty, i. 58.
Cuba, i. 37, 38.
Cumberland Road, i. 209.
Dacres, J. R., captain of the “Guerriere,” ii. 27, 37, 373;
his action with the “Constitution,” 373–375.
Dalberg, Duc, negotiates with Joel Barlow, ii. 259;
his remonstrances to Bassano against Napoleon’s treatment of the
United States, 262.
Dallas, Alexander James, third lieutenant of the frigate
“President,” ii. 28, 32.
Daveiss, Joseph H., offers to serve as a volunteer in Harrison’s
campaign, ii. 94;
urges an attack on Tippecanoe, 99, 101;
his death, 103, 104, 107.
Dearborn, Fort, at Chicago, murders at, ii. 110;
garrison at, 294;
evacuated, 334.
Dearborn, Henry, appointed collector at Boston, i. 9;
his orders, as Secretary of War, to Wilkinson, Dec. 2, 1808, 169;
appointed senior major-general, ii. 289;
his plan of campaign, 297, 306, 340, 341;
reaches Albany, 304;
goes to Boston, 305;
his difficulties at Boston, 306, 307, 309;
returns to Albany, 310;
ignorant that he commands operations at Niagara, 310, 322, 339;
sends militia to Niagara, 321;
negotiates armistice, 322, 323, 340;
effect of armistice, 324, 343;
armistice rejected by the President, 340;
his opinion of Van Rensselaer, 353;
his campaign against Montreal, 360;
his reflections on the campaign of 1812, 360, 361;
Monroe’s criticisms of, 396, 397;
George Hay’s remark on, 421.
Decatur, Stephen, captain in U. S. navy, commands squadron, ii.
363;
his orders, 363, 364, 368;
his advice, 364;
his first cruise in 1812, 366, 368, 375;
his second cruise, 381;
captures the “Macedonian,” 382, 383;
returns to port with prize, 383.
Decrees, French, of 1798, ii. 139.
Decrees of Berlin, Milan, and Bayonne, i. 24, 152, 297;
their rigid enforcement, 30;
Champagny’s argument in defence of, 31, 32;
their effect on England, 46;
their effect on France, 138;
Napoleon drafts, June 10, 1809, decree repealing that of Milan,
139–141;
lays aside draft of repealing decree, 141;
drafts Vienna decree of August, 1809, retaliating the
Non-intercourse Act, 143, 144, 150, 230;
Louis’s resistance to, 148, 240, 241;
Napoleon’s condition of repeal, 229, 245, 250, 251;
null and void for licensed vessels, 248;
declared by Champagny revoked on Nov. 1, 1810, 255;
declared revoked by Madison, 304, 317, 347, 348;
Russell’s reports on the revocation, 381–396;
declared revoked by Champagny for Feb. 2, 1811, 386, 389, 390;
not revoked, 394, 395;
declared fundamental laws by Napoleon, 397, 407;
declared successful by Napoleon, 398;
considered suspended by Madison, 400, 401;
recognized by United States, 402, 403;
their revocation doubted by Russell, 395, 400, 406;
their revocation affirmed by Russell, 405;
enforced on the Baltic, 426, 427;
Barlow instructed that they are considered revoked, 427;
revocation asserted by Pinkney, ii. 3, 5, 6, 11;
evidence of revocation asked by Wellesley, 4;
argued by Pinkney, 7, 8;
revocation denied by Wellesley, 23;
affirmed to be still in force by Foster, 41;
affirmed by Monroe to be revoked as far as America has a right to
expect, 42;
their international and municipal characters, 43;
argued by Monroe, 4, 45;
their revocation unknown to the President, 56;
argued by Serurier, 60;
disputed by Madison, 64;
their revocation a personal affair with Madison, 65;
their effect on the northwestern Indians, 83;
declared not repealed by British courts, 118;
their repeal doubted by Madison and Monroe, 120, 187–189;
repeal asserted in annual message, 125;
repeal assumed by House committee, 133, 134;
repeal denied by Monroe, 194, 195, 201;
repeal assumed by Monroe, 198;
Bassano’s report on validity of, 216, 253;
repeal assumed by Madison, 218, 224;
repeal maintained by Monroe till June, 1812, 232;
Bassano’s instructions on repeal of, 248–249;
repeal asserted by Barlow, 252;
evidence of repeal required by Barlow, 254;
Decree of St. Cloud, dated April 28, 1811, repealing, 255–257,
259;
still enforced, 260, 261;
revocation unknown to the French authorities, 262, 263.
Decree of Rambouillet, March 23, 1810, sequestering American
property in retaliation for the Non-importation Act, i. 236,
242, 274;
of July 25, 1810, regarding licenses, 247;
of July 22, 1810, confiscating American property in Dutch and
Spanish ports, 258;
of Aug. 5, 1810, confiscating American property in France, 258.
Decrès, Denis, Duc, Napoleon’s minister of marine, i. 142, 143;
Marmont’s story of, 222.
Delaware Indians, ii. 73.
Denmark, spoliations in, i. 409, 411.
Detroit, military situation of, ii. 293, 295, 301;
measures for protection of, 296;
Hull’s difficulties in defending, 315, 322, 324;
Hull besieged in, 325–331;
Brock’s attack on, 332–334;
Hull’s surrender of, 334, 393;
reinforcements for, 391;
expedition to recover, to be commanded by Harrison, 392, 393.
Dexter, Samuel, defeats project of State convention in
Massachusetts, ii. 402.
Duane, William, editor of the “Aurora,” his attacks on Gallatin, i.
361, 364.
Duval, Gabriel, appointed Justice of the Supreme Court, ii. 429.
Eel River Miami Indians, ii. 71, 75.
Elections in 1809, i. 12, 13, 158;
in 1810, 215, 316;
in Massachusetts in April, 1811, ii. 115;
in April, 1812, 204;
in May, 1812, 209;
in New York, May, 1812, 209;
presidential, of 1812, 409, 410, 412–414.
Electoral College in 1808 and 1812, ii. 413.
Elliott, Jesse D., lieutenant U. S. navy, ii. 344;
cuts out British vessels at Fort Erie, 347.
Embargo, repeal of, i. 33;
Turreau’s complaints of repeal, 34, 35, 37;
Canning’s note on, 42;
revocation of orders attributed to, 75, 77;
John Taylor’s explanation of repeal, 195, 196;
approved by Napoleon, 254;
causes France to lose her colonies, 254;
its effect on the northwestern Indians, ii. 83;
for sixty days, recommended by the President, March 31, 1812,
193, 194, 195, 197, 198;
Foster’s report on, 199;
act passed by Congress, 201, 202.
England, financial dangers of, in 1809, i. 46, 47;
political decline of, 57, 58;
distress of, in 1811, ii. 2;
apathy of, upon American questions, 24;
change of tone between 1807 and 1812, 225, 270, 286;
war declared against, 228, 229;
distress of, in 1812, 268;
attitude toward the war, 405.
Eppes, John W., member of Congress from Virginia, chairman of
Committee of Ways and Means in Eleventh Congress, i. 76;
his appropriation bills for 1810, 200;
his bill for reviving non-intercourse against Great Britain, 338;
maintains doctrine of contract with France, 341;
waits arrival of Serurier, 345;
amends his non-intercourse bill, 351;
quarrels with John Randolph, 352.
Erie, Fort. (See Fort Erie.)
Erie, Lake, armaments on, ii. 296, 304, 317, 344.
Erskine, David Montague, British minister to the United States, i.
34;
his report, March 17, 1809, of Turreau’s anger at the repeal of
embargo, 34, 35;
his threatening despatches of November and December, 1808, 49,
50;
his instructions of Jan. 23, 1809, 52–57, 66, 70–72, 90, 94,
111;
his reasons for exceeding instructions, 67, 70, 94;
his settlement of the “Chesapeake affair,” 67, 68;
“Chesapeake” settlement disavowed by Canning, 88, 89;
his settlement of commercial disputes, 70–73;
his commercial arrangement received in England, 87;
disavowed, 90, 95;
his explanation of the order of April 26, 1809, 82, 83;
his reply to Canning’s criticisms, 94;
his recall, 95;
effect of his disavowal in the United States, 109;
Jackson’s opinion of, 119, 120;
his farewell audience, 120;
effect of his arrangement on Napoleon, 139, 140, 141;
comparison between his pledges and those of Champagny, 301.
“Essex,” 32-gun frigate, her action with the “Alert,” ii. 35, 377;
arrives with despatches, 52, 56;
sails in July, 1812, 377;
returns to port, 378.
Essex county In Massachusetts, declaration of meeting, ii. 402.
Eustis, William, appointed Secretary of War, i. 9;
orders Wilkinson not to camp at Terre aux Bœufs, 172, 174;
authorizes Harrison to buy Indian land in the Wabash valley, ii.
82;
approves Harrison’s purchase, 85;
orders Harrison to preserve peace with Indians, 88, 93;
orders the Fourth Regiment to Indiana, 92, 93;
his lost letter of Sept. 18, 1811, to Harrison, 95;
appears before the Committee of Foreign Relations, 129;
his supposed incompetence, 168, 206, 392, 395, 396, 397, 398;
his duties in 1812, 168;
on recruiting, 294;
his letters to William Hull, announcing war, 299;
and ordering conquests in Canada, 302;
his orders to Dearborn to repair to Albany, 306, 308, 309;
and to take direction of militia at Niagara, 310, 321, 340;
resigns, 422.
Exchange, turn of, against England, in 1808, i. 47.
Fagan, agent of Fouché, i. 239.
“Federal Republican” newspaper, ii. 406, 407.
Federalist party, deprived of grievances, i. 77;
praise Madison, 78, 158;
make common cause with Jackson, 158;
described by Giles, 180.
Federalists, in Congress, Foster’s reports of their conduct and
advice, ii. 171–175;
their reception of Henry’s documents, 183, 184;
cease attempts to discuss war, 227, 228;
their attitude towards the war, 398, 399;
support Clinton for the presidency, 410.
Fenwick, John R., lieut.-colonel of Light Artillery, ii. 352.
Ferdinand VII., proposed kingdom for, in America, i. 239;
cedes Florida by treaty of 1819, ii. 236.
Fernandina in East Florida, seized by United States, ii. 240;
occupation disavowed and maintained, 242, 243.
Finances in 1809, i. 163, 178;
customs-revenue in 1807, 1808, 1809, 1810, 290, 319;
military and naval appropriations of the Eleventh Congress, 357;
in 1811; ii. 126;
Gallatin’s estimates for war, 156–159;
war-taxes proposed by Gallatin, 166;
approved by the House, 166, 167;
laid aside, 167, 168;
in 1812, 432, 433;
in 1813, 438–448.
(See Loans.)
Findlay, James, colonel of Ohio volunteers, ii. 298, 315, 326.
Findley, William, member of Congress from Pennsylvania, favors war,
ii. 145.
Florida, Napoleon’s retention of, i. 32, 33;
Napoleon insinuates an idea regarding, 408;
Foster instructed to protest against the seizure of, ii. 23;
his protest, 37;
Monroe’s reception of the protest, 38, 39.
Florida, East, Madison asks authority to occupy, i. 326, 327;
Congress authorizes occupation of, 327;
commissioners sent to take possession of, 327;
revolutionized, ii. 237–243;
bill for occupation of, 243.
Florida, West, revolution in, i. 307–315;
Madison orders occupation of, 310–312, 318;
Claiborne takes possession of, 313;
organized as part of Orleans Territory, 314;
protest of British chargé, 314, 315;
Giles’s bill for annexing to Orleans Territory, 320;
debate on annexation, 320–323;
Macon’s bill, admitting, as a part of Louisiana, 323, 324;
remains a separate territory, 326;
divided by act of Congress, ii. 236;
ceded by Spain in 1819, 237.
Forfeitures under the Non-importation act, ii. 436–443.
Fort Dearborn, Chicago, ii. 110, 294;
garrison massacred, 334.
Fort Erie, ii. 343, 347, 348, 358.
Fort George, ii. 300, 343, 347;
Brock’s headquarters, 341, 348, 349, 351.
Fort Harrison, ii. 95, 106, 294.
Fort Niagara, bombarded, ii. 355.
Fortifications, appropriation for, in 1809, i. 85;
appropriation asked for, in 1810, 319.
Foster, Augustus John, appointed British minister to the United
States, ii. 16, 21;
F. J. Jackson’s opinion of, 22;
his instructions, 22, 23;
arrives at Washington, 37, 52;
protests against the seizure of Florida, 37;
reports Monroe’s language about Spanish America, 38;
protests against the non-importation, 39;
narrows the issue to Fox’s blockade and the Orders in Council,
40, 41;
reports Monroe’s language on the revocation of the French
decrees, 42;
threatens retaliation for the non-importation, 44;
reports that the Orders in Council are the single object of
irritation, 45;
settles the “Chesapeake” affair, 121, 122;
his report of executive temper in November, 1811, 131;
his report of Gallatin’s language about taxes, 156;
his report of the conduct of Federalists in Congress, 172–175;
receives instructions, March 21, 1812, 191;
communicates them, 192;
his report of Monroe’s remarks on recent French spoliations, 195,
198;
his report of Madison’s and Monroe’s remarks on the embargo of
April, 1812, 199;
suggests Madison’s re-election, 213.
Fouché, Joseph, Duc d’Otrante, Napoleon’s minister of police, i.
222;
opposes the commercial system, 224;
sends an agent to the British government, 238, 239;
disgraced and exiled, 241.
France, alienation between United States and, i. 28–41, 141–151;
difficulties of commerce with, 152, 245;
value of spoliations in 1809, 1810, 242, 243;
contract with, 339, 340;
unfriendly language of the annual message toward, ii. 125;
Madison’s language regarding, 187, 218, 224;
theory of contract with, apparently abandoned, 223;
Monroe’s language regarding, 232.
(See Napoleon.)
Fremantle, Colonel, letter on the situation of Parliament, i. 58.
Frigates. (See Navy, “President,” “Constitution,” “United States,”
“Chesapeake,” “Congress,” “Constellation,” “Essex,” and
“Adams.”)
“Frolic,” British sloop-of-war, ii. 379;
her action with the “Wasp,” 380.
Fulton’s torpedo, i. 209.
Gallatin, Albert, Secretary of the Treasury, his appointment as
Secretary of State defeated, i. 4–8;
his quarrel with Samuel Smith, 10;
his conversation with Turreau about the Floridas, 38, 39;
his remarks to Turreau on renewing intercourse with Great
Britain, 74;
his letters on Erskine’s disavowal, 110, 111;
his expectations from Jackson’s mission, 110, 116, 117;
his feud with Giles, Smith, and Leib, 159;
his letter of remonstrance to Jefferson, 160, 161, 164;
his enemies, 167;
his annual report of 1809, 178;
his bill for excluding British and French ships, 183 (see Macon);
his remarks on Napoleon’s secret confiscations, 259;
his remarks to Turreau on revival of non-intercourse against
England, 303;
gives notice of revival of non-intercourse against England, 304;
his annual report of 1810, 319;
his dependence on the bank, 329, 335;
asks an increase of duties, 357;
his letter of resignation, 360–366;
Serurier’s estimate of, ii. 46;
his annual report of November, 1811, 126;
attacked by Giles, 148, 149;
delays his estimates, 156;
his war-taxes, 156–159, 165, 166, 204;
reported June 26, 235;
his loan of 1812, 206, 207;
believed to think war unnecessary, 225;
complains of Congress, 234, 235;
reports tax-bills to Congress, 235;
his instructions at the outbreak of war, 301;
his opinion of Eustis, 397, 398;
claims department of State, 424;
his annual report of Dec. 5, 1812, 433, 438;
his views on the forfeiture of merchandise imported in 1812, 439,
440;
his attitude toward war-taxation, 446.
Gardenier, Barent, member of Congress from New York, his remarks on
Jefferson and Madison, i. 79, 80;
supports Macon’s bill, 185;
cause of changing rule of previous question, 353.
Gaudin, Duc de Gaete, orders of, i. 348.
George III., king of England, becomes insane, i. 288; ii. 2.
George, Prince of Wales, his Whig associations, ii. 3, 4;
becomes Prince Regent, Feb. 6, 1811, 14;
retains Spencer Perceval’s ministry, 14;
his audience of leave for William Pinkney, 16, 18–20;
his conditional declaration of April 21, 1812, that the Orders in
Council should be withdrawn, 254, 282.
Gerry, Elbridge, elected governor of Massachusetts in 1810 and
1811, i. 215; ii. 115;
defeated in 1812, 204;
nominated for the vice-presidency, 214;
elected, 413.
“Gershom,” American brig, burned by French squadron, ii. 193, 198.
Gholson, Thomas, member of Congress from Virginia, moves new rule
of previous question, i. 353.
Giles, William Branch, senator from Virginia, defeats Gallatin’s
appointment as Secretary of State i. 4–7;
votes for mission to Russia, 11;
his report on F. J. Jackson, 178, 179, 182, 183;
wishes energy of government, 180, 189;
his bill for the annexation of West Florida, 319, 320;
his speech on the Bank charter, 333;
his political capacity, 363;
reports bill for raising twenty-five thousand troops, ii. 147;
his speech attacking Gallatin, 148, 149;
his factiousness, 150;
his admission of errors, 154;
his speech on the volunteer bill, 161;
votes for war, 229;
votes against occupying East Florida, 243;
on seamen’s bill, 454.
Gore, Christopher, elected governor of Massachusetts in 1809, i.
12;
invites F. J. Jackson to Boston, 213;
defeated in the election of 1810, 215;
and in 1811, ii. 115.
“Grace Ann Greene,” American vessel released by Napoleon, i. 391.
Graham, John, his account of public opinion in Kentucky, ii. 394.
Grandpré, Louis, i. 306, 307.
Grenville, Lord, on Canning, i. 49.
Grétry, i. 235.
Grundy, Felix, member of Congress from Tennessee, ii. 122, 137,
196;
on Committee of Foreign Relations, 124, 128;
his speech in favor of war, 137–141;
favors large army, 152;
opposes war-power, 161;
against frigates, 164;
on embargo, 201;
on the political effects of war, 213;
on forfeitures, 443;
reports bill for regulation of seamen, 452, 453.
“Guerriere,” British frigate, ii. 25;
“Little Belt” mistaken for, 26–30;
Captain Dacres of, 37;
joins Broke’s squadron, 368;
chases “Constitution,” 370;
captured by “Constitution,” 372–375.
Gunboats, i. 168.
Hamilton, Paul, appointed Secretary of the Navy, i. 9, 206;
his orders to Commodore Rodgers of June 9, 1810, ii. 26;
of May 6, 1811, 25;
his supposed incompetence, 169, 290, 395, 398;
his orders to Rodgers, Decatur, and Hull in June, 1812, 363–365,
368;
his orders of September, 1812, 378;
resigns, 428.
Hammond, George, Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, i. 45.
Hampton, Wade, brigadier-general in U. S. army, i. 169;
takes command at New Orleans, 175; ii. 291.
Hanson, A. C., ii. 407.
Harper, Robert Goodloe, ii. 144.
Harrison, Fort, ii. 95, 106, 294.
Harrison, William Henry, governor of Indiana Territory, ii. 68;
his account of Indian affairs, 69–73;
his treaties of 1804 and 1805, 75, 77;
his influence in the dispute about slavery in Indiana, 75–77;
his interview with the Prophet in August, 1808, 80;
his treaty of Sept. 30, 1809, 83, 84;
his interview with Tecumthe of Aug. 12, 1810, 85–88;
his letter to Tecumthe June 24, 1811, 90;
his talk with Tecumthe July 27, 1811, 91;
instructed to avoid hostilities, 93;
raises military forces, 93;
sends army up the Wabash valley, 94;
constructs Fort Harrison, 95;
marches on Tippecanoe, 97;
his arrival, 98–100;
his camp, 102;
attacked, 103;
his return to Vincennes, 106;
Humphrey Marshall’s opinion of, 107;
his estimate of the effect of his campaign, 107, 108;
appointed by Kentucky to command expedition to recover Detroit,
392, 420;
unable to advance, 412.
Hauterive, Alexandre Maurice, Comte d’, charged with negotiations
with Armstrong, i. 140, 141.
Hawkesbury, Lord. (See Liverpool.)
Hay, George, his advice to Monroe, ii. 421.
Henry, John, secret agent of Sir James Craig, his report on
disunion, i. 14;
recalled, 86;
demands money, ii. 176;
comes to Boston, 177;
employs Crillon to negotiate with Monroe, 178;
obtains fifty thousand dollars, 179;
sails for Europe, 180;
papers of, 182;
supposed effect of, in Florida affairs, 241.
Holland, exempted from the non-intercourse, i. 72, 90–92, 112.
(See Louis Bonaparte.)
Holland, Lord, ii. 275.
Holstein, Duchy of, i. 413.
“Hornet,” sloop-of-war, brings despatches, ii. 215, 217;
cruises with Rodgers’ squadron, 365, 366;
at Boston, 378, 381;
her second cruise, 384;
blockades the “Bonne Citoyenne,” 384.
Howell, Jeremiah B., senator from Rhode Island, votes against
occupying West Florida, ii. 243.
Hull, Isaac, captain in U. S. navy, commands “Constitution,” ii.
364;
his orders, 364;
chased by a British squadron, 369–371;
captures “Guerriere,” 372–375;
takes command at New York, 383.
Hull, William, governor of Michigan Territory, ii. 292;
appointed brigadier-general, 292, 298;
his advice regarding the defence of Detroit, 296;
his march to Detroit, 298;
his loss of papers, 300;
arrives at Detroit, 301;
invades Canada, 302, 317;
his proclamation, 303;
his required campaign, 311;
decides to besiege Malden, 312–314;
sudden discovery of his danger, 314, 315;
evacuates Canada, 315;
his situation at Detroit, 322–329;
his capitulation, 332, 334;
Jefferson’s opinion of, 336, 398.
Illinois Territory, population in 1810, i. 289.
Impressment becomes a _casus belli_, ii. 116–118;
not expressly mentioned as such by Pinkney, 18;
or in the annual message, 125;
treated by House Committee of Foreign Relations, 134, 135;
mentioned by Grundy, 139;
by Madison’s war-message, 222;
only obstacle to peace, 430–432, 450–452;
extent of, 451, 452.
Impressments, i. 74, 292, 351, 352.
India, career of Marquess Wellesley in, i. 266.
Indiana Territory, population in 1810, i. 289;
created in 1800, ii. 68;
its dispute about the introduction of slavery, 75;
adopts second grade of territorial government, 76.
Indians in 1810, i. 318;
in the Northwest, ii. 69;
their condition described by Governor Harrison, 69;
trespasses on their territory, 70;
effects of intoxication upon, 71, 72;
murders committed upon, 72, 73;
Jefferson’s policy toward, 73–75;
Harrison’s treaties with, in 1804 and 1805, 75;
Tecumthe and the Prophet, 78;
Jefferson’s refusal to recognize them as a confederated body, 79;
establishment at Tippecanoe Creek, 79–81;
their hostility to cessions of land, 82, 87;
their land-cession of Sept. 30, 1809, 83, 84;
their outbreak imminent in 1810, 85;
outbreak delayed by British influence, 85;
their interview with Harrison, Aug. 12, 1810, 86–88;
government wishes peace with, 89;
of the Six Nations in Upper Canada, wish to remain neutral, 319;
their employment in war by the British, 320;
murders by, 393, 394.
Infantry, Fourth Regiment of, ordered to Indiana July, 1811, ii.
92, 93;
arrives, 94;
part of the expedition to Tippecanoe, 96;
losses in the battle, 104;
its share in the battle, 107;
ordered to Detroit, 110;
marches to Detroit, 298;
at the battle of Maguaga, 325.
Invisibles, the, i. 363.
Jackson, Francis James, his reputation, i. 96;
appointed British minister to the United States, 97;
his instructions, 99–105;
sails for America, 105;
Gallatin’s expectations from, 111, 117;
arrives at Washington, 115, 116;
his impressions, 117–120;
his negotiation, 120–132;
rupture with, 132;
his anger, 154, 155;
his complaints, 156;
his reception in Baltimore and New York, 157;
discussed before Congress, 176, 178, 179, 182;
his letters from New York and Boston, 212–218;
returns to England, 219;
his treatment by Wellesley, 218, 219, 269, 271, 272;
his influence with the British government, ii. 13;
his account of Pinkney’s “inamicable leave,” 20;
his opinion of Augustus J. Foster, 22;
his death, 22.
Jackson, Mrs. F. J., i. 115, 157.
“Java,” British frigate, her action with the “Constitution,” ii.
385, 386.
Jefferson, Thomas, Turreau’s anger with, i. 34;
Gallatin’s remarks on, 38, 39;
the “National Intelligencer” on, 75;
Randolph’s remarks on, 78;
Robert Smith’s remarks on, 84;
intermediates with Monroe, 161, 162;
expenditures of his administration, 200, 205, 206;
considered too timid by Robert Smith, ii. 48;
his Indian policy, 69, 73–75, 78, 79, 81;
his opinion of William Hull, 336, 398;
his expectation of the conquest of Canada, 337;
his opinion of Van Rensselaer, 398.
Jesup, Thomas S., acting adjutant-general at Detroit, ii. 329.
Johnson, Richard Mentor, member of Congress from Kentucky, i. 197,
203; ii. 122;
his war speech, 142;
on the dangers of a navy, 164;
on the treason of opposition, 212.
Jones, Jacob, captain in U. S. navy, commands the “Wasp,” ii. 379;
his action with the “Frolic,” 380;
captured, 381;
takes command of the “Macedonian,” 383.
Jones, Walter, his letter to Jefferson, on dissensions in Madison’s
Cabinet, i. 188.
Jones, William, appointed Secretary of the Navy, ii. 428, 429.
Kentucky, enthusiasm for the war, ii. 390;
number of men in the field, 391, 393;
distaste for the regular army, 391, 394.
Key, Philip Barton, member of Congress from Maryland, i. 185.
King, Rufus, his supposed opposition to Clinton, ii. 410.
Labouchere, i. 238, 239.
Lambert, Henry, captain of the British frigate “Java,” ii. 385,
386.
Langdon, John, of New Hampshire, nominated for the Vice-Presidency,
ii. 214.
Lansdowne, Marquis of, ii. 275.
Lauriston, Marquis de, French ambassador to Russia, i. 418.
Lee, Henry, crippled by Baltimore rioters, ii. 407, 408.
Leib, Michael, senator from Pennsylvania, i. 181, 189, 191; ii.
229, 243;
votes against Bank charter, 337;
his political capacity, 364.
Licenses of trade, British, i. 59, 64;
scandal of, 273;
debate on, 274, 275;
Canning’s remarks on, 278, 280;
Sidmouth’s conditions on, 281;
Castlereagh proposes to abandon, 221, 282.
Licenses, Napoleon’s system of, i. 246–249;
promised abandonment of, 392, 393;
continued issue of, 400;
repudiated by Napoleon, 414, 417, 422;
municipal character of, ii. 43;
their continued issue, 54;
extension of, 250.
Lincoln, Levi, declines appointment as justice, i. 359.
Lingan, James Maccubin, killed by Baltimore rioters, ii. 407, 408.
“Little Belt,” British sloop of-war, affair of, i. 25–37, 45, 270.
Livermore, Edward St. Loe, member of Congress from Massachusetts,
i. 184.
Liverpool, Lord, on American partiality to France, i. 50;
succeeds Castlereagh at the War Department, 263.
Lloyd, James, senator from Massachusetts, ii. 183.
Loan for 1810, i. 178;
of 1812, for eleven millions, ii. 169;
partial failure of, 207;
of 1813, for twenty millions, 433, 448.
Long, Charles, joint paymaster-general of the forces, i. 58.
Louis Bonaparte, king of Holland, resists Napoleon’s decrees, i.
146;
his interview with Armstrong, 147, 148;
threatened by Napoleon, 236, 237, 240;
stipulates seizure of American ships, 240, 274;
abdicates, 242.
Louisiana, government offered to Monroe, i. 162;
proposed as a kingdom for the French Bourbons, 239;
admitted into the Union, 323–326; ii. 235.
Lowndes, William, member of Congress from South Carolina, ii. 122,
164;
his hostility to non-importation, 205, 234, 445, 448;
opposes compromise of forfeitures, 442.
Lyon, Matthew, member of Congress from Kentucky, i. 358.
McArthur, Duncan, colonel of Ohio militia, ii. 298, 326, 328, 332,
334.
“Macedonian,” British frigate, capture of, ii. 382, 383.
McKee, John, ii. 237.
Macon, Nathaniel, member of Congress from North Carolina, votes
with Federalists, i. 182;
his bill for excluding British and French shipping, 183, 184;
bill defeated by Senate, 185, 191, 193;
Samuel Smith’s motives for defeating, 185–188, 192, 193;
his bill No. 2, 194, 195;
adopted by Congress, 197, 198;
his remark on manufacturing influence, 197;
his speech on reducing the army and navy in 1810, 201;
his bill admitting the State of Louisiana, with West Florida,
into the Union, 323–326;
not candidate for speaker, ii. 123, 124;
his account of the opinions prevailing at Washington, 129;
supports war, 145;
his remark on France and England, 196.