CHAPTER VIII.

UNDER these circumstances President Madison was to meet Congress; but

bad as his situation was in foreign affairs, his real troubles lay

not abroad but at home. France never counted with him as more than an

instrument to act on England. Erskine and Canning, by their united

efforts, had so mismanaged English affairs that Madison derived from

their mismanagement all the strength he possessed. The mission of

Jackson to Washington retrieved a situation that offered no other

advantage.

Jackson lost no occasion to give the President popularity.

Comprehending at last that his high tone had only helped his opponent

to carry out a predetermined course, Jackson lost self-confidence

without gaining tact. At first he sustained himself by faith in

Canning; but within a short time he heard with alarm the news from

England that Canning was no longer in office or in credit. For a

few days after the rupture he had a right to hope that the quarrel

would not be pressed to a scandal; but November 13, the “National

Intelligencer” published an official statement which embarrassed

Jackson to the last point of endurance.

“I came prepared to treat with a regular government,” he wrote

to his brother,[118] “and have had to do with a mob, and mob

leaders. That I did not show an equal facility with Erskine to

be duped by them has been my great crime.”

That Jackson should be angry was natural, and if he was abusive, he

received an ample equivalent in abuse; but his merits as a diplomatist

were supposed to be his courage and his truth, and these he could not

afford to compromise. He had neither said nor done more than stood in

his express orders. Canning’s instructions charged Madison with fraud:

“The American government cannot have believed that such an

arrangement as Mr. Erskine consented to accept was conformable

to his instructions.... They cannot by possibility have believed

that without any new motive, and without any apparent change in

the dispositions of the enemy, the British government could have

been disposed at once and unconditionally to give up the system

on which they had been acting.”

This ground Jackson had been ordered to take in any “preliminary

discussion” which might “in all probability” arise before he could

enter on the details of his negotiation. In obedience to these

instructions, and well within their limits, Jackson had gone as near

as he dared to telling the President that he alone was to blame for

the disavowal of Erskine, because Erskine’s instructions “were at the

time in substance made known” to him. In subsequently affirming that

he made no insinuation which he could not substantiate, Jackson still

kept to what he believed the truth; and he reiterated in private what

he insinuated officially, that Erskine had been “duped” by the American

government. November 16 he wrote officially to the Foreign Office that

without the slightest doubt the President had full and entire knowledge

of Erskine’s instruction No. 2.[119] These views were consistent and

not unreasonable, but no man could suppose them to be complimentary

to President Madison; yet November 13 Jackson caused his secretary,

Oakeley, to send in his name an official note to the Secretary of

State, complaining of the rupture and rehearsing the charges, with the

conclusion that “in stating these facts, and in adhering to them, as

his duty imperiously enjoined him to do, Mr. Jackson could not imagine

that offence would be taken at it by the American government, as most

certainly none could be intended on his part.”[120] He then addressed

the same counter-statement as a circular to the various British

consuls in the United States, and caused it to be printed in the

newspapers,[121]--thus making an appeal to the people against their own

Government, not unlike the more famous appeal which the French Minister

Genet made in 1793 against President Washington.

In extremely bad temper Jackson quitted the capital. His wife wrote to

her friends in joy at the prospect of shortening her stay in a country

which could offer her only the tribute of ignorant admiration; but even

she showed a degree of bitterness in her pleasure, and her comments

on American society had more value than many official documents in

explaining the attitude of England toward the United States:--

“Francis, being accustomed to treat with the civilized courts

and governments of Europe, and not with savage Democrats,

half of them sold to France, has not succeeded in his

negotiation.”[122]

At Washington she had seen few ladies besides Mrs. Madison, “une bonne,

grosse femme, de la classe bourgeoise, ... sans distinction,” and also,

to do her justice, “sans prétensions;” who did the British minister’s

wife the honor to copy her toilettes. Immediately after the rupture

Mrs. Jackson went to Baltimore, where she was received with enthusiasm

by society; but Baltimore satisfied her little better than Washington:

“Between ourselves their cuisine is detestable; coarse table-linen,

no claret, champagne and madeira indifferent.” Only as the relative

refinement of New York and Boston was reached, with the flattery

lavished upon the British minister by the Federalist society of the

commercial cities, did Mrs. Jackson and her husband in some degree

recover their composure and their sense of admitted superiority.

Incredible as the folly of a political party was apt to be, the folly

of the Federalists in taking up Jackson’s quarrel passed the limits

of understanding. After waiting to receive their tone from England,

the Federalist newspapers turned on their own path and raised the cry

that Madison had deceived Erskine, and had knowingly entered into an

arrangement which England could not carry out. The same newspapers

which in April agreed with John Randolph that Canning had obtained

through Erskine all he had ever asked or had a right to expect, averred

in October that Erskine surrendered everything and got nothing in

return. No political majority, still less a minority, could survive

a somersault so violent as this; and the Federalists found that all

their late recruits, and many friends hitherto stanch, deserted them

in the autumn elections. Throughout the country the Administration

was encouraged by great changes in the popular vote, even before the

rupture with Jackson. With confidence, Madison might expect the more

important spring elections to sweep opposition from his path. Although

a whole year, and in some cases eighteen months, must pass before a new

Congress could be chosen, the people were already near the war point.

Vermont chose a Republican governor and a legislature Republican

in both branches. In Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey the

Administration recovered more than the ground lost by the embargo.

In Maryland the feud between Samuel Smith and his opponents was

ended by a Republican majority so large that nothing could prevent

Smith’s return to the Senate, although every one knew that he would

carry on a system of personal opposition, if he dared, and that a

moderate Federalist would be less dangerous to the Administration.

In the general return of deserters to the ranks, the party would not

be too strict in its punishments; and the President set the example

by clemency to the worst offender, except John Randolph, of all the

trusted lieutenants in the party service. He held out a hand to Monroe.

Madison’s reasons for winning Monroe were strong. The more he had to do

with Robert Smith, the more intolerable became the incubus of Smith’s

incompetence. He had been obliged to take the negotiations with Erskine

and Jackson wholly on his own shoulders. The papers drafted by Smith

were, as Madison declared,[123] brought from the Department of State

in a condition “almost always so crude and inadequate that I was, in

the more important cases, generally obliged to write them anew myself,

under the disadvantage sometimes of retaining through delicacy some

mixture of his draft.” Smith had not even the virtue of dullness. He

could not be silent, but talked openly, and criticised freely the

measures of Government, especially those of commercial restriction.

Complicated with this incessant annoyance was Gallatin’s feud. The

combination of the Smiths with Giles, Leib, and Duane’s “Aurora”

against Gallatin had its counterpart in the Clintonian faction which

made Madison its target; and whenever these two forces acted together,

they made, with the Federalists, a majority of the Senate. Gallatin

saw the necessity of breaking down this combination of intrigue which

had already done incalculable harm by forcing Robert Smith into the

State Department. He foresaw the effects of its influence in weakening

the Treasury in order to expel himself. On a visit to Monticello in

August he spoke plainly to Jefferson and Madison, and pointed out the

probability that he should be forced to resign. Jefferson reflected six

weeks on this communication, and then wrote entreating him to stand

firm.[124] November 8, the day of the rupture with Jackson, Gallatin

answered Jefferson’s appeal in a long and outspoken letter evidently

meant for communication to Madison:--

“It has seemed to me from various circumstances that those who

thought they had injured were disposed to destroy, and that

they were sufficiently skillful and formidable to effect their

object. As I may not, however, perhaps, see their actions

with an unprejudiced eye, nothing but irresistible evidence

both of the intention and success will make me yield to that

consideration.... I do not ask that in the present situation

of our foreign relations the debt be reduced, but only that

it shall not be increased so long as we are not at war. I do

not pretend to step out of my own sphere and to control the

internal management of other departments; but it seems to me

that as Secretary of the Treasury I may ask, that, while peace

continues, the aggregate of the expenditure of those departments

be kept within bounds such as will preserve the equilibrium

between the national revenue and expenditure without recurrence

to loans. I cannot consent to act the part of a mere financier,

to become a contriver of taxes, a dealer of loans, a seeker of

resources for the purpose of supporting useless baubles, of

increasing the number of idle and dissipated members of the

community, of fattening contractors, pursers, and agents, and of

introducing in all its ramifications that system of patronage,

corruption, and rottenness which you so justly execrate.”

From this avowal Madison’s difficulties could be understood and his

course foreseen. Very slow to move, he was certain at last to quarrel

with the senatorial faction that annoyed him. He could not but

protect Gallatin, and dismiss Smith. At the end of the vista, however

far the distance, stood the inevitable figure of Monroe. Scarcely

another man in public life could fill precisely the gap, and none

except Armstrong could give strength to the President by joining him.

Perhaps Littleton Tazewell, another distinguished Virginian of the

same school, would have answered the President’s purpose as well as

Monroe; but probably Tazewell would have declined to accept a seat in

the Cabinet of a President whose election he had opposed.[125] Madison

decided to take the first step. He had reason to think that Monroe

repeated his course, at least to the extent of wishing reconciliation.

He authorized Jefferson to act as mediator; and the Ex-President,

who spared no effort for harmony, hastened to tell Monroe that the

government of Louisiana was still at his disposal.[126] Monroe declined

the office as being beneath his previous positions, but said that he

would have accepted the first place in Madison’s Cabinet, and was

sincere in his desire for the success of the Administration; he even

pledged his support, and intimated that he had lost favor with John

Randolph owing to, his exertions for Madison. When Jefferson reported

the result of this interview, the President replied:[127] “The state

of Colonel Monroe’s mind is very nearly what I had supposed; his

willingness to have taken a seat in the Cabinet is what I had not

supposed.” Considering the state of Monroe’s mind in 1808, Madison

might be excused for failing to see that Monroe would accept the State

Department in February, 1809. Indeed, the suddenness of the change

would have startled Monroe’s best friends; and even in December, 1809,

he would have fared ill had his remarks to Jefferson been brought to

John Randolph’s ears.

Monroe’s adhesion having been thus attested, Madison made no immediate

use of the recruit, but held him in reserve until events should

make action necessary. Perhaps this delay was one of Madison’s

constitutional mistakes, and possibly a prompt removal of Robert

Smith might have saved some of the worst disasters that befell the

Government; but in truth Madison’s embarrassments rose from causes that

only time could cure, and were inherent in American society itself. A

less competent administrative system seldom drifted, by reason of its

incompetence, into war with a superior enemy. No department of the

government was fit for its necessary work.

Of the State Department, its chief, and its long series of mortifying

disasters, enough has been said. In November, 1809, it stood helpless

in the face of intolerable insults from all the European belligerents.

Neither the diplomatic nor the consular system was better than a

makeshift, and precisely where the Government felt most need of

ministers,--at Copenhagen, Stockholm, Berlin, and St. Petersburg,--it

had no diplomatic and but few consular agents, even these often of

foreign allegiance.

The Treasury, hitherto the only successful Executive department, showed

signs of impending collapse, not to be avoided without sacrifices and

efforts which no one was willing to make. The accounts for the year

ending September 30 showed that while the receipts had amounted to

$9,300,000, the actual expenses had exceeded $10,600,000. The deficit

of $1,300,000, as well as reimbursements of debt to the amount of

$6,730,000, had been made good from the balance in the Treasury. The

new fiscal year began with a balance of only $5,000,000; so that

without a considerable curtailment of expenses, a loan or increased

taxation, or both, could not be avoided. Increased taxation was the

terror of parties. Curtailment of expense could be effected only on the

principle that as the government did nothing well, it might as well do

nothing. Any intelligent expenditure, no matter how large or how small,

would have returned a thousand-fold interest to the country, whatever

had been the financial cost; but the waste of money on gunboats and

useless cruisers, or upon an army so badly organized and commanded

as to be a hindrance in war, was an expense that might perhaps be

curtailed, though only by admitting political incapacity.

Naturally Gallatin threatened to resign. Even by submitting to the

Smiths, Duanes, Gileses, and Leibs, and allowing them to cut off the

sources or waste the supplies of public revenue until the government

became an habitual beggar, he could promise himself no advantage.

Never had the chance of finding an end to the public embarrassments

seemed so remote. The position in which the government stood could not

be maintained, but could be abandoned only by creating still greater

difficulties. Intended merely as a makeshift, the Non-intercourse

Act of March 1, 1809, had already proved more mischievous to America

than to the countries it purported to punish. While the three great

commercial nations--France, England, and the United States--were

forcing trade into strange channels or trying to dam its course,

trade took care of itself in defiance of war and prohibitions. As

one coast after another was closed or opened to commerce, countries

whose names could hardly be found on the map--Papenburg, Kniphausen,

Tönningen--became famous as neutrals, and their flags covered the

sea, because England and France found them convenient for purposes

of illegitimate trade. The United States had also their Papenburg.

Amelia Island and the St. Mary’s River, which divided Florida from

Georgia, half Spanish and half American waters, became the scene of a

trade that New York envied. While the shore was strewn with American

cotton and other produce waiting shipment in foreign vessels, scores

of British ships were discharging merchandise to be smuggled into the

United States, or were taking on board heavy freights of cotton or

naval stores on American account. To the United States this manner of

trading caused twofold loss. Not only were the goods charged with a

double voyage and all the costly incidents of a smuggling business, and

not only did the American ship-owner lose the freight on this American

merchandise, both outward and inward, but the United States government

collected no duties on the British goods smuggled from Amelia Island,

Bermuda, and Halifax. The Non-intercourse Act prohibited French and

British merchandise; but in disregard of the prohibition such goods

were freely sold in every shop. Erskine’s arrangement, short as it

was, brought in a fresh and large supply; custom-house oaths were

cheap; custom-house officials did not inquire closely whether cloth was

made in England, France, Holland, or Germany, or whether rum, sugar,

and coffee came from St. Kitt’s or St. Bart’s. Some sorts of English

goods, such as low-priced woollens, were necessities; and the most

patriotic citizen could hardly pay so much respect to the laws of his

country as to dispense with their use by his family, whatever he did on

his own account. Finally, a law which in the eyes of a community was

not respectable was not respected. The community had no other defence

against bad legislation; and in a democracy the spirit of personal

freedom deserved cultivation to the full as much as that of respect for

bad law. The Non-intercourse Act was not only a bad law,--the result of

admitted legislative imbecility,--but it had few or no defenders even

among those who obeyed it.

Ingenuity could hardly have invented a system less advantageous for

the government and people who maintained it. The government lost its

revenue, the shipping lost much of its freight, the people paid double

prices on imports and received half-prices for their produce; industry

was checked, speculation and fraud were stimulated, while certain

portions of the country were grievously wronged. Especially in the

Southern States all articles produced for exchange were depressed to

the lowest possible value, while all articles imported for consumption

were raised to extravagant rates. Elisha Potter, a Congressman from

Rhode Island, complained with reason that the system made the rich more

rich and the poor more poor.[128] In a crowded or in a highly organized

society such a system would probably have created a revolution; but

America had not yet reached such a stage of growth or decay, and the

worst effect of her legislation was to impoverish the government which

adopted and the class of planters who chiefly sustained it.

Gallatin best knew how much the Non-intercourse Act or any other system

of commercial restriction weakened the Treasury. He knew that neither

the President nor Congress offered the germ of a better plan. He faced

an indefinite future of weakness and waste, with a prospect of war at

the end; but this was not the worst. His enemies who were disposed to

destroy, were skilful enough to invent the means of destruction. They

might deprive him of the United States Bank, his only efficient ally;

they might reject every plan, and let the Treasury slowly sink into

ruin; they might force the country into a war for no other object than

to gratify their personal jealousies. Gallatin believed them capable of

all this, and Madison seemed to share the belief. The Treasury which

had till that time sustained the Republican party through all its

troubles, stood on the verge of disaster.

From the military and naval departments nothing had ever been

expected; but their condition was worse than their own chiefs

understood. The machinery of both broke down as Madison took control.

The navy consisted of a few cruisers and a large force of gunboats.

Neither were of immediate use; but a considerable proportion of both

were in active service, if service could be called active which chiefly

consisted in lying in harbor or fitting for harbor defence when no

enemy was expected. No sooner had Paul Hamilton succeeded Robert Smith

at the navy department than the new secretary became aware that his

predecessor had wasted a very large sum of money.[129] Hamilton made no

concealment of his opinion that gunboats were expensive beyond relation

to their value.[130] He intimated that the life of gunboats hardly

exceeded one year, and that their value depended on the correct answer

to the inquiry whether war was a defensive or aggressive operation.

This hint that gunboats could do no harm to their enemies seemed to

gain force from the suggestion that they had yet to prove their uses

for their friends; but if Jefferson’s gunboat system should prove to

be a failure, nothing would be left of the navy except a few frigates

and sloops which could hardly keep the sea in the event of war with

England. The navy was a sink of money.

The army was something worse. At least the navy contained as good

officers and seamen as the world could show, and no cruisers of their

class were likely to be more efficient than the frigates commanded

by Rodgers, Bainbridge, and Decatur, provided they could escape a

more numerous enemy; but the army was worthless throughout, and its

deficiency in equipment was a trifling evil compared with the effects

of political influence on its organization. The first attempt to

raise the army to efficiency ended in scandalous failure within a

few months. Among a thousand obstacles to any satisfactory reform in

the military service, the most conspicuous if not the most fatal was

General Wilkinson, whom President Jefferson could not and would not

sacrifice, but whose character and temper divided the army into two

hostile camps. Wade Hampton, the next general officer in rank, regarded

Wilkinson with extreme contempt, and most of the younger officers who

were not partisans of Jefferson shared Hampton’s prejudice; but July

4, 1808, a military court of inquiry formally acquitted Wilkinson of

being a Spanish pensioner. President Jefferson had already saved him

from court-martial on account of his relations with Burr, and Secretary

Dearborn restored him to command over an army whose interests required

an officer of other qualities.

When Madison and Gallatin in December, 1808, looked to a declaration

of war, their first anxiety concerned New Orleans and West Florida.

December 2, 1808, Secretary Dearborn gave Wilkinson, then at

Washington, orders to direct the new levies of troops toward New

Orleans, and to be ready to take command there in person as soon as

practicable. In pursuance of these orders, two thousand raw soldiers

were directed upon New Orleans from different quarters, and in the

midst of war preparations, Jan. 24, 1809, Wilkinson himself embarked

from Baltimore.[131] Stopping at Annapolis, Norfolk, and Charleston, he

passed six weeks on the Atlantic coast. After the overthrow of the war

policy and the close of the session he sailed March 12 from Charleston,

and in his mysterious way stopped at Havana and then at Pensacola,

“under a special mission from the Executive of the United States.”

April 19 he re-entered New Orleans, the scene of his exploits three

years before; and he returned as a victor, triumphant over Daniel Clark

and the Burr conspirators, as well as over Governor Claiborne, Wade

Hampton, and all ill-wishers in the subordinate ranks of the army, of

whom Captain Winfield Scott was one.

Wilkinson found at New Orleans, in his own words,[132]--

“A body of two thousand undisciplined recruits, men and officers

with a few exceptions sunk in indolence and dissipation; without

subordination, discipline, or police, and nearly one third of

them sick; ... without land or water transport for a single

company; medical assistance for two thousand men dependent

on two surgeons and two mates, one of the former confined to

his bed; a majority of the corps without paymasters; the

men deserting by squads; the military agent representing the

quartermaster’s department without a cent in his chest, his

bills protested, and he on the eve of shutting up his office; a

great deficiency of camp equipage; not a haversack in store; the

medicine and hospital stores scarcely sufficient for a private

practitioner.”

The General decided that, first of all, the troops must be removed from

the city and sent into camp; but rains made encampment impossible until

the river should fall, and May 12 nothing had been done excepting to

notify the Secretary of War that in the course of the following week

the General meant to select an encampment which would be so placed as

to meet an attack from every hostile quarter.[133] His decision was

made known to the Secretary of War in a letter dated May 29:--

“With the general voice of American and Creole in favor of

it, I have selected a piece of ground on the left bank of the

Mississippi, below this city about four leagues, which I find

perfectly dry at this moment, although the surface of the river,

restrained by its dykes, is in general three feet above the

level of the country. You will put your finger on the spot,

at the head of the English turn, just where the road to the

settlements on the Terre aux Boeufs leaves the river.”[134]

June 10 the main body of troops moved down the river to the new camp.

More than five hundred sick were transported with the rest, suffering

chiefly from chronic diarrhœa, bilious or intermittent fevers, and

scurvy.

Secretary Eustis, who in March succeeded Dearborn at the War

Department, being an army-surgeon by profession, noticed, before

Wilkinson’s arrival at New Orleans, the excessive proportion of troops

on the sick-list. Quickly taking alarm, he wrote April 30 directing

Wilkinson to disregard Dearborn’s previous instructions, and after

leaving a garrison of old troops at New Orleans, to transport the rest

up the river to the high ground in the rear of Fort Adams, or Natchez.

The orders were peremptory and pressing.[135]

This letter, dated April 30, should have gone, and was believed to have

gone, by the post which left Washington May 6, and reached New Orleans

May 25; another post followed a week later, and still another arrived

June 8, two days before the troops moved to Terre aux Boeufs. According

to Wilkinson the letter did not arrive by any of these mails, but came

only by the fourth post, which reached New Orleans June 14, after he

and his troops were fixed in camp. The cost of a bad character was

felt at such moments. No one believed Wilkinson; his reputation for

falsehood warranted suspicion that he had suppressed the orders in the

belief that he knew best what the troops required. Such insubordination

was no new thing on his part. Instead of expressing regret, he wrote to

Eustis that even had he received the orders of April 30 in time, he

should still “have not sought the position you recommended,” because

the labor of ascending the river would have diseased nine tenths of

the men, the expense would have exceeded twelve thousand dollars, and

the position of Fort Adams was ill-suited for the protection of New

Orleans.[136]

On the troops the first effect of their encampment was good; but

after the middle of June rains began, generally several showers on

the same day, and the camp was deep in mud. The number of sick made

proper sanitary care impossible. The police officer’s report of July

12[137] gave a revolting picture of the sanitary conditions: “The

whole camp abounds with filth and nastiness of almost every kind.” The

sick-list rose to six hundred and sixty in a force of sixteen hundred

and eighty-nine non-commissioned officers and men; in August it rose

to nine hundred and sixty-three in a total force of fifteen hundred

and seventy-four. The camp was a fever hospital, the suffering beyond

experience. Food, medicine, shelter, clothing, and care were all

wanting either to the sick or to the well:[138]--

“The sick and the well lived in the same tents; they generally

subsisted on the same provisions, were equally exposed to the

constant and incessant torrents of rain, to the scorching heat

of the sun, and during the night to the attacks of numberless

mosquitoes. They manifested the pains and sufferings they

experienced by shrieks and groans which during the silence of

the night were distinctly to be heard from one end of the line

to the other. It is my candid belief the mosquitoes produced

more mischief than any other cause. In the night the air was

filled with them, and not a man was provided with anything like

a bar or net. Thus situated, the sufferings of the unfortunate

sick can perhaps better be imagined than described.”

Before the army had been a month in camp, the officers petitioned

the General for removal. He could not but refuse. He had no means of

escape, and to do him justice, he bore with courage the consequences

of his own mistake. He did whatever occurred to him to protect his

men. Secretary Eustis took the matter less calmly. No sooner did the

secretary learn, through Wilkinson’s letters written in May, that he

seriously meant to encamp the troops at Terre aux Boeufs, than official

orders, admitting no discretion, were despatched as early as June 22

from the Department, directing that the whole force should be instantly

embarked for Natchez and Fort Adams.

The letter arrived July 19. Wilkinson dared not again disobey, although

he might be right in thinking that the risks of removal were greater

than those of remaining. Every resource of the army and navy was put

at Wilkinson’s command, and every man at Terre aux Boeufs was eager to

escape; yet week after week passed without movement. The orders which

arrived July 19 were not made public till the end of August, and only

September 14 was the camp evacuated. The effective force was then

about six hundred men in charge of nine hundred invalids. The strength

of all had been reduced, until they were unequal to the fatigues of

travel. Only one hundred and twenty-seven men died at Terre aux Boeufs

between June 10 and September 14; but two hundred and fifty died on

their way up the river, before October 31, and altogether seven hundred

and sixty-four, out of two thousand soldiers sent to New Orleans,

died within their first year of service. The total loss by death and

desertion was nine hundred and thirty-one.

Wilkinson himself was attacked by fever in passing New Orleans,

September 19, and on proceeding to Natchez soon received a summons

to Washington to answer for his conduct. Brigadier-General Wade

Hampton succeeded him in command of what troops were still alive at

New Orleans. The misfortune was compensated only by the advantage of

affording one more chance to relieve the army and the government of a

general who brought nothing but disaster.

With the four departments of Executive government in this state of

helplessness, President Madison met Congress, the least efficient body

of all.

History of the United States of America, Volume 5 (of 9) · 第 8 / 19 章