America's Answer to the British Claim of the Right
of Search.
[=The Causes of the War of 1812=]
By their first war with Great Britain our forefathers asserted and
maintained their right to independent national existence; by their
second war with Great Britain, they claimed and obtained equal
consideration in international affairs. The War of 1812 was not based
on a single cause; it was undertaken from mixed motives,--partly
political, partly commercial, partly patriotic. It was always unpopular
with a great number of the American people; it was far from logical in
some of its positions; it was perhaps precipitated by party clamor.
But, despite all these facts, it remains true that this war established
once for all the position of the United States as an equal power among
the powers. Above all--clearing away the petty political and partisan
aspects of the struggle--we find that in it the United States stood
for a strong, sound, and universally beneficial principle, that of the
rights of neutral nations in time of war. "Free ships make free goods"
is a maxim of international law now universally recognized, but at the
opening of the century it was a theory, supported, indeed, by good
reasoning, but practically disregarded by the most powerful nations. It
was almost solely to the stand taken by the United States in 1812 that
the final settlement of this disputed principle was due.
[=British Impressment of American Seamen=]
The cause of the War of 1812, which appealed most strongly to the
patriotic feelings of the common people, though, perhaps, not in itself
so intrinsically important as that just referred to, was unquestionably
the impressment by Great Britain of sailors from American ships. No
doubt great numbers of English sailors did desert from their naval
vessels and avail themselves of the easier service and better treatment
of the American merchant ships. Great Britain, in the exigencies of
her desperate contest with Napoleon, was straining every nerve to
strengthen her already powerful navy, and the press-gang was constantly
at work in English seaports. Once on board a British man-of-war, the
impressed sailor was subject to overwork, bad rations, and the lash.
That British sailors fought as gallantly as they did under this regime
will always remain a wonder. But it is certain that they deserted
in considerable numbers, and that they found in the rapidly-growing
commercial prosperity of our carrying trade a tempting chance of
employment.
[=Outrages Upon American Ships and Sailors=]
Great Britain, with a large contempt for the naval weakness of the
United States, assumed, rather than claimed, the right to stop our
merchant vessels on the high seas, to examine their crews, and to
take as her own any British sailors among them. This was bad enough
in itself, but the way in which the search was carried out was worse.
Every form of insolence and overbearing was exhibited. The pretense of
claiming British deserters covered what was sometimes barefaced and
outrageous kidnapping of Americans. The British officers went so far
as to lay the burden of proof of nationality in each case upon the
sailor himself; if he were without papers proving his identity he was
at once assumed to be a British subject. To such an extent was this
insult to our flag carried, that our Government had the record of about
forty-five hundred cases of impressment from our ships between the
years of 1803 and 1810; and when the War of 1812 broke out the number
of American sailors serving against their will in British war vessels
was variously computed to be from six to fourteen thousand. It is even
recorded that in some cases American ships were obliged to return
home in the middle of their voyages because their crews had been so
diminished in number by the seizures made by British officers that they
were too short-handed to proceed. In not a few cases these depredations
led to bloodshed.
[=The Affair of the "Chesapeake" and the "Leopard"=]
The greatest outrage of all, and one which stirred the blood of
Americans to the fighting point, was the capture of an American war
vessel, the _Chesapeake_, by the British man-of-war, the _Leopard_. The
latter was by far the more powerful vessel, and the _Chesapeake_ was
quite unprepared for action; nevertheless, her commander refused to
accede to a demand that his crew be overhauled in search for British
deserters. Thereupon the _Leopard_ poured broadside after broadside
into her until her flag was struck. Three Americans were killed and
eighteen wounded; four were taken away as alleged deserters; of these,
three were afterwards returned, while in one case the charge was
satisfactorily proved and the man was hanged. The whole affair was
without the slightest justification under the law of nations and was
in itself ample ground for war. Great Britain, however, in a quite
ungracious and tardy way, apologized and offered reparation. This
incident took place six years before the actual declaration of war. But
the outrage rankled during all that time, and nothing did more to fan
the anti-British feeling which was already so strong in the rank and
file of Americans, especially in the Democratic (or, as it was then
often called, the Republican) party. It was such deeds as this that led
Henry Clay to exclaim, "Not content with seizing upon all our property
which falls within her rapacious grasp, the personal rights of our
countrymen--rights which must forever be sacred--are trampled on and
violated by the impressment of our seamen. What are we to gain by war?
What are we not to lose by peace? Commerce, character, a nation's best
treasure, honor!"
[=The Era of Paper Blockades=]
The interference with American commerce was also a serious threat to
the cause of peace. In the early years of the century Great Britain
was at war not only with France, but with other European countries.
Both Great Britain and France adopted in practice the most extreme
theories of non-intercourse between neutral and hostile nations. It was
the era of "paper blockades." In 1806 England, for instance, declared
that eight hundred miles of the European coast were to be considered
blockaded, whereupon Napoleon, not to be outdone, declared the entire
Kingdom of Great Britain to be under blockade.
Up to a certain point the interruption of the neutral trade relations
between the countries of Europe was to the commercial advantage of
America. Our carrying trade grew and prospered wonderfully. Much of
this trade consisted in taking goods from the colonies of European
nations, bringing them to the United States, then trans-shipping them
and conveying them to the parent nation. This was allowable under the
international law of the time, although the direct carrying of goods
by the neutral ship from the colony to the parent nation (the latter,
of course, being at war) was forbidden. But by her famous "Orders in
Council" Great Britain absolutely forbade this system of trans-shipment
as to nations with whom she was at war. American vessels engaged in
this form of trade were seized and condemned by English prize courts.
Naturally, France followed Great Britain's example and even went
further. Our merchants, who had actually been earning double freights
under the old system, now found that their commerce was woefully
restricted. At first it was thought that the unfair restriction might
be punished by retaliatory measures, and a quite illogical analogy was
drawn from the effect produced on Great Britain before the Revolution
by the refusal of the colonies to receive goods on which a tax had been
imposed. So President Jefferson's administration resorted to the most
unwise measure that could be thought of--an absolute embargo on our own
ships, which were prohibited from leaving port.
[=Jefferson and the Embargo=]
[=War Declared Against Great Britain=]
This measure was passed in 1807, and its immediate result was to
reduce the exports of this country from nearly fifty million dollars'
worth to nine million dollars' worth in a single year. This was
evidently anything but profitable, and the act was changed so as to
forbid only commercial intercourse with Great Britain and France and
their colonies, with a proviso that the law should be abandoned as
regards either of these countries which should repeal its objectionable
decrees. The French government moved in the matter first, but only
conditionally. Our non-intercourse act, however, was after 1810 in
force only against Great Britain. That our claims of wrong were
equally, or nearly so, as great against France in this matter cannot be
doubted. But the popular feeling was stronger against Great Britain;
a war with England was popular with the mass of the Democrats; and
it was the refusal of England to accept our conditions which finally
led to the declaration of war. By a curious chain of circumstances it
happened, however, that between the time when Congress declared war
(June 18, 1812) and the date when the news of this declaration was
received in England, the latter country had already revoked her famous
"Orders in Council." In point of fact, President Madison was very
reluctant to declare war, though the Federalists always took great
pleasure in speaking of this as "Mr. Madison's war." The Federalists
throughout considered the war unnecessary and the result of partisan
feeling and unreasonable prejudice.
[=The British and American Navies Compared=]
It is peculiarly grateful to American pride that this war, undertaken
in defence of our maritime interests and to uphold the honor of our
flag upon the high seas, resulted in a series of naval victories
brilliant in the extreme. It was not, indeed, at first thought that
this would be chiefly a naval war. President Madison was at one time
strongly inclined to keep our war vessels in port; but, happily, other
counsels prevailed. The disparity between the American and British
navies was certainly disheartening. The United States had seven or
eight frigates and a few sloops, brigs, and gunboats, while the
sails of England's navy whitened every sea, and her ships certainly
outnumbered ours by fifty to one. On the other hand, her hands were
tied to a great extent by the stupendous European war in which she
was involved. She had to defend her commerce from formidable enemies,
and could spare but a small part of her naval strength for battle
with the new foe. That this new foe was despised by the great power
which claimed, not without reason, to be the mistress of the seas, was
not unnatural. But soon we find a lament raised in Parliament about
the reverses of its navy, which were such as "English officers and
English sailors had not before been used to, particularly from such
a contemptible navy as that of America had always been held to be."
The fact is, that the restriction of American commerce had made it
possible for our naval officers to take their pick of a remarkably
fine body of native American seamen, naturally brave and intelligent,
and thoroughly well trained in all seamanlike experiences. These men
were in many instances filled with a spirit of resentment at British
insolence, having either themselves been the victims of the aggressions
which we have described, or having seen their friends compelled to
submit to these insolent acts. The very smallness of our navy, too, was
in a measure its strength; the competition for active service among
those bearing commissions was great, and there was never any trouble in
finding officers of proved sagacity and courage.
[=The War on the Canada Border=]
At the outset, however, the policy determined on by the administration
was not one of naval aggression. It was decided to attack England
from her Canadian colonies. This plan of campaign, however reasonable
it might seem to a strategist, failed wretchedly in execution. The
first year of the war, so far as regards the land campaigns, showed
nothing but reverses and fiascoes. There was a long and thinly settled
border country, in which our slender forces struggled to hold their
own against the barbarous Indian onslaughts, making futile expeditions
across the border into Canada, and resisting with some success the
similar expeditions by the Canadian troops. One of the complaints which
led to the war was that the Indian tribes had been incited against our
settlers by the Canadian authorities and had been promised aid from
Canada. It is certain that after war was declared British officers not
only employed Indians as their allies, but, in some instances at least,
paid bounties for the scalps of American settlers.
[=Hull and the Surrender of Detroit=]
The Indian war planned by Tecumseh had just been put down by General
(afterward President) Harrison. No doubt Tecumseh was a man of more
elevated ambition and more humane instincts than one often finds in an
Indian chief. His hope to unite the tribes and to drive the whites out
of his country has a certain nobility of purpose and breadth of view.
But this scheme had failed, and the Indian warriors, still inflamed for
war, were only too eager to assist the Canadian forces in a desultory
but bloody border war. The strength of our campaign against Canada was
dissipated in an attempt to hold Fort Wayne, Fort Harrison, and other
garrisons against Indian attacks. Still more disappointing was the
complete failure of the attempt, under the command of General Hull, to
advance from Detroit into Canada. He was easily driven back to Detroit,
and, while the nation was confidently waiting to hear of a bold defence
of that place, it was startled by the news of Hull's surrender
without firing a gun, and under circumstances which seemed to indicate
either cowardice or treachery. Hull was, in fact, court-martialed and
condemned to death, and was only pardoned on account of his services in
the war of 1776.
[=The "Constitution" and the "Guerrière"=]
[=The Glorious Victory of the Frigate "Constitution"=]
The mortification that followed the land campaign of 1812 was forgotten
in the joy at the splendid naval victories of that year. Pre-eminent
among these was the famous sea-duel between the frigates _Constitution_
and _Guerrière_. Every one knows of the glory of _Old Ironsides_, and
this, though the greatest, was only one of many victories through which
the name of the _Constitution_ became the most famed and beloved of all
that have been associated with American ships. She was a fine frigate,
carrying forty-four guns, and though English journals had ridiculed
her as "a bunch of pine boards under a bit of striped bunting," it was
not long before they were busily engaged in trying to prove that she
was too large a vessel to be properly called a frigate, and that she
greatly out-classed her opponent in metal and men. It is true that
the _Constitution_ carried six more guns and a few more men than the
_Guerrière_, but all allowances being made, her victory was a naval
triumph of the first magnitude. Captain Isaac Hull, who commanded
her, had just before the engagement proved his superior seamanship by
escaping from a whole squadron of British vessels, out-sailing and
out-manoeuvring them at every point. It was on August 19, 1812, that
he descried the Guerrière. Both vessels at once cleared for action
and came together with the greatest eagerness on both sides for the
engagement. Though the battle lasted but half an hour, it was one of
the hottest in naval annals. At one time the _Constitution_ was on
fire, and both ships were soon seriously crippled by injuries to their
spars. Attempts to board each other were thwarted on both sides by
the close fire of small arms. Here, as in later sea-fights of this
war, the accuracy and skill of the American gunners were something
marvelous. At the end of half an hour the _Guerrière_ had lost both
mainmast and foremast, and floated as a helpless hulk in the open sea.
Her surrender was no discredit to her officers, as she was almost in a
sinking condition. It was hopeless to attempt to tow her into port, and
Captain Hull transferred his prisoners to his own vessel and set fire
to his prize.
In this engagement the American frigate had only seven men killed
and an equal number wounded, while the British vessel had as many as
seventy-nine men killed or wounded. The conduct of the American seamen
was throughout gallant in the highest degree. Captain Hull put it on
record that "From the smallest boy in the ship to the oldest seaman
not a look of fear was seen. They all went into action giving three
cheers and requesting to be laid close alongside the enemy." The effect
of this victory in both America and England was extraordinary. English
papers long refused to believe in the possibility of the well-proved
facts, while in America the whole country joined in a triumphal shout
of joy, and loaded well-deserved honors on vessel, captain, officers,
and men.
[=The "Wasp" Captures the "Frolic"=]
The chagrin of the English public at the unexpected result of this
sea-battle was changed to amazement and vexation when, one after
another, there followed no less than six combats of the same duel-like
character, in all of which the American vessels were victorious. The
first was between the American sloop _Wasp_ and the English brig
_Frolic_, which was convoying a fleet of merchantmen. The fight was
one of the most desperate in the war; the two ships were brought so
close together that their gunners could touch the sides of the opposing
vessels with their rammers. Broadside after broadside was poured into
the _Frolic_ by the _Wasp_, which obtained the superior position; but
her sailors, too excited to await the victory which was sure to come
from the continued raking of the enemy's vessel, rushed upon her decks
without orders and soon overpowered her. Again the British loss in
killed and wounded was large; that of the Americans very small. It in
no wise detracted from the glory of this victory that both victor and
prize were soon captured by a British man-of-war of immensely superior
strength.
[=The "United States" and the "Macedonian"=]
Following this action, Commodore Stephen Decatur, in the frigate
_United States_, attacked the _Macedonian_, a British vessel of the
same class, and easily defeated her, bringing her into New York harbor
on New Year's Day, 1813, where he received an ovation equal to that
offered Captain Hull. The same result followed the attack of the
_Constitution_, now under the command of Commodore Bainbridge, upon
the British _Java_. The latter had her captain and fifty men killed
and about one hundred wounded, and was left such a wreck that it was
decided to blow her up, while the _Constitution_ suffered so little
that she was in sport dubbed _Old Ironsides_, a name now ennobled
by a poem which has been in every school-boy's mouth. Other naval
combats resulted, in the great majority of cases, in the same way; in
all unstinted praise was awarded by the nations of the world, even
including England herself, to the admirable seamanship, the wonderful
gunnery, and the personal intrepidity of our naval forces. When the
second year of the war closed our little navy had captured twenty-six
warships, armed with 560 guns, while it had lost only seven ships,
carrying 119 guns.
[=American Privateers and Their Work=]
But, if the highest honors of the war were thus won by our navy, the
most serious injury materially to Great Britain was in the devastation
of her commerce by American privateers. No less than two hundred and
fifty of these sea guerrillas were afloat, and in the first year of the
war they captured over three hundred merchant vessels, sometimes even
attacking and overcoming the smaller class of warships. The privateers
were usually schooners armed with a few small guns, but carrying one
long cannon mounted on a swivel so that it could be turned to any point
of the horizon, and familiarly known as Long Tom. Of course, the crews
were influenced by greed as well as by patriotism. Privateering is a
somewhat doubtful mode of warfare at the best; but international law
permits it, and, though it is hard to dissociate from it the aspect
of legalized piracy, it is recognized to this day. In the most recent
war, however, the Spanish-American, neither of the belligerent nations
indulged in this relic of barbarism.
If privateering were ever justifiable it was in the war now under
consideration. As Jefferson said, there were then tens of thousands
of seamen cut off by the war from their natural means of support and
useless to their country in any other way, while by "licensing private
armed vessels, the whole naval force of the nation was truly brought
to bear on the foe." The havoc wrought on British trade was widespread
indeed; altogether between fifteen hundred and two thousand prizes
were taken by the privateers. To compute the value of these prizes is
impossible, but some idea may be gained from the single fact that one
privateer, the _Yankee_, in a cruise of less than two months captured
five brigs and four schooners, with cargoes valued at over half a
million dollars. The men engaged in this form of warfare were bold to
recklessness, and their exploits have furnished many a tale to American
writers of romance.
[=The Fleets on the Lakes=]
[=Perry's Great Victory on Lake Erie=]
The naval combats thus far mentioned were almost always of single
vessels. For battles of fleets we must turn from the salt water to the
fresh, from the ocean to the great lakes. The control of the waters
of Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, and Lake Champlain was obviously of vast
importance, in view of the continued land-fighting in the West and of
the attempted invasion of Canada and the threatened counter-invasions.
The British had the great advantage of being able to reach the lakes
by the St. Lawrence, while our lake navies had to be constructed after
the war began. One such little navy had been built at Presque Isle,
now Erie, on Lake Erie. It comprised two brigs of twenty guns and
several schooners and gunboats. It must be remembered that everything
but the lumber needed for the vessels had to be brought through the
forests by land from the eastern seaports, and the mere problem of
transportation was a serious one. When finished, the fleet was put in
command of Oliver Hazard Perry. Watching his time (and, it is said,
taking advantage of the carelessness of the British commander, who
went on shore to dinner one Sunday, when he should have been watching
Perry's movements), the American commander drew his fleet over the
bar which had protected it while in harbor from the onslaughts of
the British fleet. To get the brigs over this bar was a work of time
and great difficulty; an attack at that hour by the British would
certainly have ended in the total destruction of the fleet. This feat
accomplished, Perry, in his flagship, the _Lawrence_, headed a fleet of
ten vessels, fifty-five guns and four hundred men. Opposed to him was
Captain Barclay with six ships, sixty-five guns, and also about four
hundred men. The British for several weeks avoided the conflict, but
in the end were cornered and forced to fight. It was at the beginning
of this battle that Perry displayed the flag bearing Lawrence's famous
dying words, "Don't give up the ship!" No less famous is his dispatch
announcing the result in the words, "We have met the enemy and they are
ours." The victory was indeed a complete and decisive one; all six of
the enemy's ships were captured, and their loss was nearly double that
of Perry's forces. The complete control of Lake Erie was assured; that
of Lake Ontario had already been gained by Commodore Chauncey.
[=The Battle of the Thames=]
Perry's memorable victory opened the way for important land operations
by General Harrison, who now marched from Detroit with the design of
invading Canada. He engaged with Proctor's mingled body of British
troops and Indians, and by the battle of the Thames drove back the
British from that part of Canada and restored matters to the position
in which they stood before Hull's deplorable surrender of Detroit--and,
indeed, of all Michigan--to the British. In this battle the Indian
chief, Tecumseh, fell, and about three hundred of the British and
Indians were killed on the field. The hold of our enemies on the Indian
tribes was greatly broken by this defeat.
Previous to this the land campaigns had been marked by a succession of
minor victories and defeats. In the West a force of Americans under
General Winchester had been captured at the River Raisin, where there
took place an atrocious massacre of prisoners by the Indians, who were
quite beyond restraint from their white allies. On the other hand, the
Americans had captured the city of York, now Toronto, though at the
cost of their leader, General Pike, who, with two hundred of his men,
was destroyed by the explosion of a magazine. Fort George had also
been captured by the Americans and an attack on Sackett's Harbor had
been gallantly repulsed. Following the battle of the Thames, extensive
operations of an aggressive kind were planned, looking toward the
capture of Montreal and the invasion of Canada by way of Lakes Ontario
and Champlain. Unhappily, jealousy between the American Generals
Wilkinson and Hampton resulted in a lack of concert in their military
operations, and the expedition became a complete fiasco.
[=Lawrence's Famous Saying, "Don't Give Up the Ship."=]
One turns for consolation from the mortifying record of Wilkinson's
expedition to the story of the continuous successes which accompanied
the naval operations of 1813. Captain Lawrence, in the _Hornet_, won
a complete victory over the English brig _Peacock_; our brig, the
_Enterprise_, captured the _Boxer_, and other equally welcome victories
were reported. One distinct defeat marred the record--that of our
fine brig, the _Chesapeake_, commanded by Captain Lawrence, which was
captured after one of the most hard-fought contests of the war by the
British brig, the _Shannon_. Lawrence himself fell mortally wounded,
exclaiming as he was carried away, "Tell the men not to give up the
ship, but fight her till she sinks." It was a paraphrase of this
exclamation which Perry used as a rallying signal in the battle on Lake
Erie. Despite his one defeat, Captain Lawrence's fame as a gallant
seaman and high-minded patriot was untarnished, and his death was more
deplored throughout the country than was the loss of his ship.
[=Macdonough's Victory on Lake Champlain=]
In the latter part of the war England was enabled to send large
reinforcements both to her army and navy engaged in the American
campaigns. Events in Europe seemed in 1814 to insure peace for at least
a time. Napoleon's power was broken; the Emperor himself was exiled
at Elba; and Great Britain at last had her hands free. But before the
reinforcements reached this country, our army had won greater credit
and had shown more military skill by far than were evinced in its
earlier operations. Along the line of the Niagara River active fighting
had been going on. In the battle of Chippewa, the capture of Fort
Erie, the engagement at Lundy's Lane, and the defence of Fort Erie the
troops, under the command of Generals Winfield Scott and Brown, had
more than held their own against superior forces, and had won from
British officers the admission that they fought as well under fire as
regular troops. More encouraging still was the total defeat of the plan
of invasion from Canada undertaken by the now greatly strengthened
British forces. These numbered twelve thousand men and were supported
by a fleet on Lake Champlain. Their operations were directed against
Plattsburg, and in the battle on the lake, usually called by the name
of that town, the American flotilla, under the command of Commodore
Macdonough, completely routed the British fleet. As a result the
English army also beat a rapid and undignified retreat to Canada. This
was the last important engagement to take place in the North.
[=The Burning of the American Capital=]
Meanwhile expeditions of considerable size were directed by the
British against our principal Southern cities. One of these brought
General Ross with five thousand men, chiefly the pick of the Duke
of Wellington's army, into the Bay of Chesapeake. Nothing was more
discreditable in the military strategy of our administration than
the fact that at this time Washington was left unprotected, though
in evident danger. General Ross marched straight upon the capital,
easily defeated at Bladensburg an inferior force of raw militia--who
fought, however, with much courage--seized the city, and carried out
his intention of destroying the public buildings and a great part of
the town. Most of the public archives had been removed. Ross's conduct
in the burning of Washington, though of a character common enough in
modern warfare, has been condemned as semi-barbarous by many writers.
The achievement was greeted with enthusiasm by the English papers, but
was really of much less importance than they supposed. Washington at
that time was a straggling town of only eight thousand inhabitants; its
public buildings were not at all adequate to the demands of the future;
and an optimist might even consider the destruction of the old city as
a public benefit, for it enabled Congress to adopt the plans which have
since led to the making of the most beautiful city of the country, if
not of the world.
A similar attempt upon Baltimore was less successful The people
of that city made a brave defence and hastily threw up extensive
fortifications. In the end the British fleet, after a severe
bombardment of Fort McHenry, was driven off. The British admiral had
boasted that Fort McHenry would yield in a few hours; and two days
after, when its flag was still flying, Francis S. Key was inspired by
its sight to compose our far-famed national ode, the "Star Spangled
Banner."
[=Jackson and the Creek Indians=]
[=Jackson's Famous Great Victory at New Orleans=]
A still larger expedition of British troops soon after landed on the
Louisiana coast and marched to the attack of New Orleans. Here General
Andrew Jackson was in command. He had already distinguished himself
during the war by putting down with a strong hand the hostile Creek
Indians, who had been incited by English envoys to warfare against
our southern settlers; and in April, 1814, William Weathersford,
the half-breed chief, had surrendered in person to Jackson. General
Packenham, who commanded the five thousand British soldiers sent
against New Orleans, expected as easy a victory as that of General
Ross at Washington. But Jackson had summoned to his aid the stalwart
frontiersmen of Kentucky and Tennessee--men used from boyhood to
the rifle, and who made up what was in effect a splendid force of
sharp-shooters. Both armies threw up rough fortifications; General
Jackson made great use for that purpose of cotton bales, Packenham
employing the still less solid material of sugar barrels. As it proved
neither of these were suitable for the purpose, and they had to be
replaced by earthworks. Oddly enough, the final battle, and really
the most important one of the war, took place after the treaty of
peace between the two countries had been signed. The British were
repulsed again and again in persistent and gallant attacks on our
fortifications. General Packenham himself was killed, together with
many of his officers and seven hundred of his men. One British officer
pushed to the top of our earthworks and demanded their surrender,
whereupon he was smilingly asked to look behind him, and turning saw,
as he afterwards said, that the men he supposed to be supporting him
"had vanished as if the earth had swallowed them up." Of the Americans
only a few men were killed.
[=The Results of the War=]
The treaty of peace, signed at Ghent, December 24, 1814, has been
ridiculed because it contained no positive agreement as to many of the
questions in dispute. Not a word did it say about the impressment of
American sailors or the rights of neutral ships. Its chief stipulations
were the mutual restoration of territory and the appointing of a
commission to determine our northern boundary line. The truth is that
both nations were tired of the war; the circumstances that had led to
England's aggressions no longer existed; both countries were suffering
enormous commercial loss to no avail; and, above all, the United States
had emphatically justified by its deeds its claim to an equal place in
the council of nations. Politically and materially, further warfare was
illogical. If the two nations had understood each other better in the
first place; if Great Britain had treated our demands with courtesy and
justice instead of with insolence; if, in short, international comity
had taken the place of international ill-temper, the war might have
been avoided altogether. Its undoubted benefits to us were incidental
rather than direct. But though not formally recognized by treaty, the
rights of American seamen and of American ships were in fact no longer
infringed upon by Great Britain.
[=The Hartford Convention=]
One political outcome of the war must not be overlooked. The New
England Federalists had opposed it from the beginning, had naturally
fretted at their loss of commerce, and had bitterly upbraided the
Democratic administration for currying popularity by a war carried on
mainly at New England's expense. When, in the latter days of the war,
New England ports were closed, Stonington was bombarded, Castine in
Maine was seized, and serious depredations were threatened everywhere
along the northeastern coast, the Federalists complained that the
administration taxed them for the war but did not protect them.
The outcome of all this discontent was the Hartford Convention. In
point of fact it was a quite harmless conference which proposed some
constitutional amendments, protested against too great centralization
of dower, and urged the desirability of peace with honor. But the most
absurd rumors were prevalent about its intentions; a regiment of troops
was actually sent to Hartford to anticipate treasonable outbreaks;
and for many years good Democrats religiously believed that there had
been a plot to set up a monarchy in New England with the Duke of Kent
as king. Harmless as it was, the Hartford Convention caused the death
of the Federalist party. Its mild debates were distorted into secret
conclaves plotting treason, and, though the news of peace followed
close upon it, the Convention was long an object of opprobrium and a
political bugbear.