lesson 6: crisis with england, 1807–1812 …dennis_walsh/0197c207-000f8bdf.17... · 1805 ♦ 1810...

Permission granted to reproduce for classroom use only. ©2009 Social Studies School Service. (800) 421-4246. http://socialstudies.com

96

LESSON 6: CRISIS WITH ENGLAND, 1807–1812

VocabularyOrders in Council—British orders preventing Americans from trading with France or French colonies Impressment—An act in which the British forcibly take their own deserted sailors off American ships and make them work on British shipsChesapeake Incident—A British ship attacked an unsuspecting American ship in 1807Embargo—Stopping trade with a country or countries in order to force them to change their policiesExports—Goods sold to other countries Imports—Goods bought from other countries Tecumseh—Native American leader who tried to organize various tribes of Native Americans to fight white settlers Tippecanoe—A battle in 1811 in which U.S. troops defeated the Native American forces led by Tecumseh’s brother “War Hawks”—Congressmen in 1812 who wanted the U.S. to fight the British Militia—A group of Americans who signed up to fight for their state Bounties—Money paid rewarding men for joining the army Treaty of Ghent—The treaty ending the War of 1812, under which Britain and the U.S. agreed to go back to the situation before the war Battle of New Orleans—The biggest American victory in the War of 1812, in which the American forces were led by Andrew Jackson


97

LESSON 6: CRISIS WITH ENGLAND, 1807Student Handout 1: Problem

New Republic

You are President Thomas Jefferson in 1807. The British and French are in an all-out war. Unfortunately, that means they are both interfering with American trade. The British seize American ships (about two per week) bound for French ports and the French seize American ships sailing to or from British ports. The British have the stronger navy, so their orders (the Orders in Council) to seize U.S. ships get enforced more frequently. Since American trade with the French West Indies (Martinique, Haiti) and Spanish West Indies (Cuba, Dominican Republic) helps the French, the British are especially eager to stop it. They want the U.S. to trade only with the British West Indian Islands (Jamaica and Barbados, especially) or with the other parts of the British Empire. In addition, the British stop American ships in order to capture British sailors who have deserted to the American navy, where pay is five times higher and conditions are much better. This policy of impressment makes Americans very angry. Just a few months ago, a British warship opened fire at point-blank range on an unsuspecting American ship, the Chesapeake, killing four and wounding 16 Americans, and forcing the captain to surrender. The British then searched the ship and arrested four sailors for desertion from the British navy. The American public is outraged by this Chesapeake incident, which is a humiliation to the American nation.

The Chesapeake incident could lead to war with Britain. Maybe it would be best to simply declare war and prepare the country for battle. The United States can’t allow the British to humiliate American dignity without putting up a fight. A declaration of war would force the American people to decide if they want to stand up for their rights. On the other hand, it might be better to negotiate. Maybe the British government will apologize for the incident, pay the U.S. for the deaths and damage, and agree to stop the policy of impressment. At this point, the U.S. has an army of less than 6000 men and about a dozen warships; Britain has over 200,000 men and about 600 ships.

♦1785

♦1790

♦1795

♦1800

♦1805

♦1810

♦1815

Problem

The USS Chesapeake under attack

LESSON 6: Handout 2,


98

A third option is to remove all American ships from the oceans by having a total embargo, not just of Britain, but of all countries. Without any exports, America won’t have any ships on the oceans for Britain (or France) to attack or capture, so there would be no reason for war. According to Secretary of State James Madison, the embargo will cripple the British economy, and will devastate the economies of the British West Indies. The embargo would also cripple the economy of Canada and weaken its ties with Britain and the West Indies. It could be the first step in letting America take over Canada. American exports last year were a staggering $110 million—the British probably won’t be able to bear the loss of that much trade in the midst of their war with France. Madison argues, “The efficacy of the embargo cannot be doubted. [I]t can force all nations having colonies in this quarter of the globe to respect our rights.” As it is now, Britain is not respecting our right to trade freely. Their overall policy is to keep the U.S. weak with limited trade.

A partial embargo, on just the British, would have the advantage of forcing Britain to change her policies, but without the huge losses to the American economy. However, a partial embargo would leave American ships on the ocean, so there will be more attacks and seizures by the British. Moreover, a partial embargo would be more difficult to enforce. American ships could smuggle goods to the British, whereas with a full embargo ships wouldn’t be sailing at all, so there would be less chance for smuggling. An embargo just on Britain will mean that the U.S. is taking sides against Britain in its war with France. If the U.S. were going to start a partial embargo, it would be more equitable to stop trade with both Britain and France.

History has shown that embargoes can be effective. The American colonies used embargoes effectively in the 1760s against the Stamp Act and Townshend Duties. The lost trade forced the British government to give in to the colonies in both cases and repeal (cancel) the acts.

What will you do with regard to British trade restrictions on Americans? Negotiate. While there are issues of concern between Britain and the U.S., it 1. certainly isn’t so bad that it requires such drastic steps as war or an embargo. A blockade will only hurt both the American and British economies.Declare war on Britain. Enough is enough.2. Start a full embargo: no exports to any countries. A full embargo will avoid 3. conflict because the U.S. will not have any ships on the oceans to seize. The lack of trade, meanwhile, will bring the British to their senses.Begin an embargo on Britain. The British will realize their mistake and change 4. their foolish policies.Start an embargo on Britain and France (but not neutral countries). This way, 5. the U.S. won’t be taking sides in the Napoleonic Wars.Side with Britain against France in the war and cease all trade with the French. 6. If we become allies with the British, they will not have any reason to restrict our trade.

LESSON 6: Handout 1, Page 2


99

LESSON 6: CRISIS WITH ENGLAND, 1807Student Handout 2: Outcomes

The American public was extremely upset by the Chesapeake incident. Had Congress been in session, it might have passed a declaration of war (Option 2). The sense of humiliation to the country was very high. But President Jefferson did not ask for a war declaration because the country was not prepared for it. The army and navy were so weak that the British would have been able to attack almost any of America’s coastal cities. The Secretary of War found that the militias were poorly supplied in every state; for example, there was only one musket for every five men in the Pennsylvania militia.

President Jefferson actually chose to impose an embargo, stopping exports to all other countries (Option 3). He made this decision based on the analogy to the successful boycotts in the American Revolution. Unfortunately, it was a bad analogy. Britain was much more dependent on American trade before the American Revolution than it was in 1807. Now the U.S. was more dependent on British and French trade than these countries were on U.S. trade. Moreover, Britain and France were in an all-out war in 1807, so they were in no mood to compromise—their priority was to defeat the enemy. Also, in the American Revolution, the boycott was targeted against the offending nation; it did not stop trade with every country.

The embargo dropped exports from $108 million in 1806 to $22 million in 1808, hurting New England shipping and western farming. Shipbuilding dropped by two-thirds, 30,000 sailors (out of 40,000) were put out of work, and farm prices tumbled by 50%. Sailors referred to it the “Dambargo.” Many Americans went hungry, and crime rose. Facing the disastrous economic effects of the embargo, many Americans turned to smuggling, especially with Canada. The embargo was difficult to enforce, so Congress gave customs officials broad legal powers, which reminded Americans of the tyrannical power of the British government before the Revolution. Petitions poured into Congress to repeal the embargo. A petition from Boston called those who enforced the embargo “enemies of the Constitution.” Other petitions argued that

A cartoon showing Jefferson defending the embargo to a group of unhappy men


100

the embargo helped Napoleon, since most American trade had been with Britain. One referred to Congress as having been “Frenchified.” In 1809, President Madison repealed the Embargo Act, acknowledging its failure. He replaced it with a targeted boycott against Britain and France.

The British were hurt by the embargo, but not significantly in the first two years, since by chance they had built up a large supply of wheat and cotton. British ships took over American trade. Britain increased trade around the world. British exporters were hurt, but not drastically. Since American trade with Britain and her colonies was much greater than with France and her colonies, the French loved the embargo. French leaders thought the embargo, next to America declaring war on Britain, was the best thing America could do to cripple their enemy.

By 1807, British sugar owners in the West Indies had concluded that the U.S. was much more important to them than Canada. Canada could not supply the resources to them that the U.S. could. Unfortunately for the U.S., the embargo reversed this thinking. Without American trade, the British in the West Indies increased their trade with Canada tremendously, making Canada much more central to the British Empire. The embargo also tied the U.S. to Canada more tightly. Americans could not trade with the outside world. However, the embargo was most difficult to enforce on the one country with a long border with the U.S.—Canada. In the end, the embargo made the one colony (Canada) stronger that everyone wished to make weaker. What a blunder the Embargo Act was! President Jefferson himself said, “This embargo law is certainly the most embarrassing one we have ever had to execute [carry out].”

The U.S. did carry out negotiations (Option 1), but in conjunction with the embargo. The British government apologized for the Chesapeake incident and punished the British captain. However, the British did not pay America for the losses and did not stop the practice of impressment.



101

LESSON 6: CRISIS WITH ENGLAND, 1812Student Handout 3: Problem

New Republic

The year is 1812, and you are Republican President James Madison. The British and French continue to interfere with American trade, and the U.S. continues to cut off all trade with Britain and France in an effort to get those countries to change their policies. The lack of trade is hurting the shipping trade in New England greatly. In addition, the British continue to impress (take and force into service) their own deserted sailors on American ships back into the British navy. In July of last year, the British ambassador in Washington said that the British were going to stop the Orders in Council (which restrict American trade). You issued a proclamation ending the trade restrictions with Britain, and there was celebration in the U.S. Then the British government issued new Orders in Council, which continued the tight restrictions on American trade, and the British ambassador in Washington was sent home to Britain to be replaced by a new ambassador who is very confrontational and rude. You no longer even speak to him. Meanwhile, the British continue to seize American ships.

In the meantime, the partial embargo against Britain is having a great effect in the past year. British exports to the U.S. have declined by 80% and depression has gripped England, closing factories and increasing unemployment. Businesses are petitioning Parliament to repeal the Orders in Council.

In the west, the British are giving guns to Native Americans to help them fight American settlers in the frontier. The Native Americans, under Tecumseh, have organized a powerful fighting force and allied themselves with Britain. But American forces defeated Native Americans in the Battle of Tippecanoe about eight months ago (September 1811).The victory has brought hope that the British–Native American threat could be ended permanently. Some Republicans in Congress, known as “War Hawks,” are calling for war to drive the British out of Canada in order to stop the supply of rifles to the Native Americans. Congressman Felix Gundy, who lost three brothers to Native American attacks, says, “We shall drive the British from our continent. They will no longer have an opportunity of intriguing with our Indian neighbors.” Republicans also

♦1785

♦1790

♦1795

♦1800

♦1805

♦1810

♦1815

Problem

The Battle of Tippecanoe


102

think our embargoes against Britain haven’t worked. They think the U.S. has been too easy with Britain. Why not just fight the British? They aren’t showing any respect for the United States. Respect must be earned. Henry Clay of Kentucky says the British injuries and insults are “atrocious.” He stated, “I am for resistance by the sword.”

At this point, the U.S. has an army of about 6000 men and a navy of 16 warships; Britain has 250,000 men and 600 ships around the world. Since there are so few men in the U.S. army, the country will have to rely on state militias if there is war. In addition, the federal government does not have enough money to pay for the many expenses of war.

Several congressional committees (controlled by the War Hawks) have recommended that the U.S. declare war against Britain. If you don’t ask Congress for a declaration of war before Congress declares war on its own, you will look weak and your Republican Party will be divided in this presidential election year. On the other hand, if you ask for a declaration of war, you will unify your divided party; few will want to oppose a president from his own party on the issue of war. A majority of congressmen favor war, so it is clear that a declaration of war will pass (although it will not be overwhelming, since many congressmen also oppose war). When you took a strong stand against the British two years ago, the Republicans won a clear majority in Congress. Strong and decisive action now will help both you and your party in the election.

Some congressmen are suggesting that the U.S. fight France too, since America has the same problems with the French. After all, the French have also been restricting American trade and taking American ships. In fact, while the British have seized 389 ships, the French have taken 558 ships. Others argue against war: Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin argues that America is likely to lose the war, which would lead to a disgraceful peace and humiliation for the United States. America shouldn’t fight until the country is fully prepared militarily, and the country isn’t prepared for war at this point. Moreover, Western areas are vulnerable to Native American attacks. A lot of innocent frontiersmen could be killed. Congressman John Randolph argues that if America fights Britain, the U.S. will be seen as helping the tyrant Napoleon. Americans will be called “parasites of France.”

Canada is very weak, having a total population of less than 500,000, while the American population of 7.7 million is over 15 times as large. Moreover, many Americans from New York and Vermont have moved to Canada, so it already has thousands of people sympathetic to the U.S. It is the weakest part of the British Empire, and it is located right next to the U.S. In the past three years, the British have built up Canada significantly, especially in the lumber trade. Britain also needs Canada’s resources, especially for the West Indian Islands. If the U.S. takes over Canada, it would dramatically hurt Britain. Several American newspapers are calling for the U.S. to invade Canada in an effort to deprive Britain of this important colony. Many Americans believe that the Canadians dislike the British government so much that they will welcome an American takeover. Thomas Jefferson feels that to conquer Canada would be “a mere matter of marching.” Secretary Eustis says, “We can take Canada without soldiers.”



103

What will you do about this 1812 crisis with Britain?Negotiate. The problems between the U.S. and Britain are not serious enough to 1. continue the embargo or start a war. Declare war on Britain. Enough is enough.2. Declare war on Britain and France. The French and British have both been seizing 3. our ships.Continue the embargo on Britain. The British will realize their mistake and 4. change their foolish policies.Drop the embargo on Britain and side with Britain against France in the war. If 5. Americans become allies of the British, the British will not have any reason to restrict American trade.



104

LESSON 6: CRISIS WITH ENGLAND, 1812Student Handout 4: Outcomes

President Madison asked Congress to declare war on Britain. He thought fighting France at the same time would be foolish and only increase the odds of the U.S. losing. The war did help Madison and the Republicans achieve victory in the election of 1812, as the whole party united behind Madison to fight the war.

Ominously, the vote in Congress for the declaration of war was divided, 79-49 in the House and 19–13 in the Senate. The country remained divided throughout the war. Most Federalists, particularly residents of New England, opposed the war. Federalist leaders encouraged followers to obstruct the war effort, action that was viewed as treasonous by many Americans. Antiwar newspaper articles outraged supporters of the war. On several occasions, mobs attacked newspaper publishers. In one riot, a reporter was stabbed to death as rioters yelled, “Kill the Tory!” Free speech was limited during the war, and smuggling was widespread.

The war went terribly for the U.S. The government was too small to coordinate a war, so the armies were disorganized and there was no overall plan. There were too few resources to equip and supply the army, as the government was taking in very little money in taxes. American artillery and muskets were out of date, many from the Revolutionary War. Since the U.S. army was so small (about 7000 men), most fighting was done by state militias. That meant that there was very little cooperation between militia groups. Some militia regiments would not even fight outside the borders of their states. Since Congress had not increased taxes, American credit was poor and therefore interest rates on loans were even higher. The government was forced to borrow heavily to finance the war.

The U.S. had some success in Canada at first, but it was short-lived. The British captured Detroit, and the Americans never really threatened Canada thereafter. The American armies that intended to invade Canada fell apart. The British blockaded the American coast, which hurt the American economy greatly. The British also invaded near Baltimore and captured and burned Washington D.C. The capture and burning of the capital symbolized the many American failures in the war. Taxes doubled, which further burdened the American people. Even with the higher taxes, however, the government ran short of money. Many soldiers weren’t paid, and desertions rose dramatically. To keep the army going, Congress considered but rejected the idea of a

The damaged U.S. Capitol, after the British attempted to burn it


105

draft (which would have required every male over age 18 to serve in the military if called to do so). Instead, Congress increased the bounties (payments) made to encourage men to enlist in the military. About 1900 American soldiers, and a similar number of British soldiers, were killed in action in the war, along with about 1000 American civilians.

At the end of the war, the U.S. settled for an agreement to go back to the situation before the war. In the Treaty of Ghent, all captured territory went back to its original country and the trade restrictions remained. There was no settlement on the issue of impressment. In 1812, President Madison took the country to war because the British were not respecting American trading rights, but the treaty ending the war made no change in

those rights. The U.S. accomplished none of its goals in the war.

Nevertheless, the U.S. won the Battle of New Orleans , which due to the slow communication of the peace treaty, actually occurred after the war had already ended. Americans focused on the battles won, including two victories in New York State and numerous naval victories, which boosted pride in the young republic. A shaky young republic with a disorganized army and weak navy had fought the mighty British and managed to survive. That was a great feat to many Americans. One American leader said, “The war renewed and reinstated the National Feelings and character which the Revolution had given…” The Federalist Party, which opposed the war, became very unpopular and ceased to exist as a major party. For the next ten years, America had only one party.

President Madison stated that the U.S. had fought the war to maintain the rights of the U.S. as an equal and independent nation. He said that not to have fought “would have acknowledged that on [water]…where all independent nations have equal and common rights, the American people were not an independent people, but colonists and vassals.”

Over time, the British and Americans settled their differences over trade. The British stopped

The signing of the Treaty of Ghent


Artist’s depiction of Andrew Jackson leading American troops at the Battle of New Orleans


106

restricting American trade and the two countries became great trading partners. Trade and friendly relations also increased between the U.S. and Canada. The War and Navy departments were reformed after the obvious problems in the war. General Andrew Jackson became a war hero after his victory at New Orleans, and was eventually elected president.



107

LESSON 7: ROADS AND CANALS, 1808–1825

Teacher Pages

This lesson raises questions about the government’s role in promoting transportation improvements (called “infrastructure” today) by examining a famous report on improvements, the debate over the Erie Canal, and the lesser-known debate over the Pennsylvania Canal. Some major risks were taken and some big mistakes made. Students will have a chance to match wits with their forebears in history.

Albert Gallatin—Secretary of the Treasury under President Jefferson; he proposed national funding for roads and canals Internal improvements—The building of roads, canals, and eventually railroads to improve trade within the countrySubsidy—Financial help provided to a business by the government Specialization—When each worker concentrates on one product or one stage of making the productAppalachian Mountains—A mountain range in the eastern part of the United States, a major barrier to moving westEmbargo—When a country restricts or stops trade with a country or countries in order to force them to change their policiesTowpath—The path for horses or mules to pull canal boats along a canal Adam Smith—A famous economist who believed in free trade Erie Canal—A profitable canal that runs from Albany to BuffaloLock—An enclosure in a canal with gates at each end, used in raising or lowering boats as they pass from one level to another

Identify underlying problemsAsk questions about contextAsk about reliability of sourcesAsk about analogiesPredict unintended consequencesPlay out options

OVERVIEW

VOCABULARY

DECISION-MAKING SKILLS EMPHASIZED

lesson 6: crisis with england, 1807–1812 …dennis_walsh/0197c207-000f8bdf.17... · 1805 ♦ 1810...

Documents