Page 75 - Demo

277There is . . . a headlong rushing into difficulties, with little calculation about the means, and little concern about the consequences. With a navy comparatively [small], we are about to enter into the lists against the greatest marine [power] on the globe. With a commerce unprotected and spread over every ocean, we propose to make a profit by privateering, and for this endanger the wealth of which we are honest proprietors. An invasion is threatened of the [British colonies in Canada, but Britain] . . . without putting a new ship into commission, or taking another soldier into pay, can spread alarm or desolation along the extensive range of our seaboard. . . .What are the United States to gain by this war? Will the gratification of some privateersmen compensate the nation for that sweep of our legitimate commerce by the extended marine of our enemy which this desperate act invites? Will Canada compensate the Middle states for [the loss of] New York; or the Western states for [the loss of] New Orleans?Let us not be deceived. A war of invasion may invite a retort of invasion. When we visit the peaceable, and as to us innocent, colonies of Great Britain with the horrors of war, can we be assured that our own coast will not be visited with like horrors?HEZEKIAH NILESA Republican Defends the WarIn 1814, what the Federalists feared had come to pass: British ships blockaded American ports, and British troops invaded American territory. In January 1815, Republican editor Hezekiah Niles uses the pages of his influential Baltimore newspaper, Niles%u2019 Weekly Register, to explain current Republican policies and blame the Federalists for American reverses.Source: Niles%u2019 Weekly Register, January 28, 1815. It is universally known that the causes for which we declared war are no obstruction to peace. The practice of blockade and impressment having ceased by the general pacification of Europe, our government is content to leave the principle as it was. . . .We have no further business in hostility, than such as is purely defensive; while that of Great Britain is to humble or subdue us. The war, on our part, has become a contest for life, liberty and property%u2014on the part of our enemy, of revenge or ambition. . . .What then are we to do? Are we to encourage him by divisions among ourselves%u2014to hold out the hope of a separation of the states and a civil war%u2014to refuse to bring forth the resources of the country against him? . . . I%u00a0did think that in a defensive war%u2014a struggle for all that is valuable%u2014that all parties would have united. But it is not so%u2014every measure calculated to replenish the treasury or raise men is opposed [by Federalists] as though it were determined to strike the %u2018star spangled banner%u2019 and exalt the bloody cross. Look at the votes and proceedings of congress%u2014and markthe late spirit [to secede from the Union]%u00a0.%u00a0.%u00a0. that existed in Massachusetts, and see with what unity of action everything has been done [by New England Federalists] to harass and embarrass the government. Our loans have failed; and our soldiers have wanted their pay, because those [New England merchants] who had the greater part of the monied capital covenanted with each other to refuse its aid to the country. They had a right, legally, to do this; and perhaps, also, by all the artifices of trade or power that money gave them, to oppress others not of their %u2018stamp%u2019 and depress the national credit%u2014but history will shock posterity by detailing the length to which they went to bankrupt the republic. . . .To conclude%u2014why does the war continue? It is not the fault of the government%u2014we demand no extravagant thing. I answer the question, and say%u2014it lasts because Great Britain depends on the exertions of her %u2018party%u2019 in this country to destroy our resources, and compel %u2018unconditional submission.%u2019Thus the war began, and is continued, by our divisions.QUESTIONS FOR ANALYSIS1. According to Washington, what is the ultimate cause of political factionalism? Why does Washington believe that factionalism is most dangerous in %u201cpopular%u201d%u2014that is, republican%u2014governments?2. Compare and contrast the Quincy and Niles documents. What specific dangers did Josiah Quincy and the Federalists foresee with regard to Republican war policies? According to Hezekiah Niles, what were the war goals of the Republican administration? Corroborate the sources to compare their perspectives on the parties.3. Read the section on the War of 1812 (%u201cThe War of 1812%u201d on pages 274%u2013283), and then discuss the accuracy of the Federalists%u2019 predictions. What historical situation influenced Federalist arguments?4. How had Republican war goals changed since the start of thewar? Niles charged the Federalists and their supporters with impeding the American war effort. What were his specific charges? Did they have any merit? How might the Federalists have defended their stance with respect to the war? Identify relevant examples from the textbook and sources.In 1814, a British fleet sailed up the Chesapeake Bay, and troops stormed ashore to attack Washington City. Retaliating for the destruction of York, the invaders burned the U.S. Capitol and government buildings. After two years of fighting, the United States was stalemated along the Canadian frontier and on the defensive in the Atlantic, and its new capital city lay in ruins. The only U.S. victories came in the Southwest. There, the ruthless Tennessee planter General Andrew Jackson and a force of militiamen defeated British- and Spanish-supported Muscogees in the Battle of Horseshoe Bend (1814) and forced the Muscogees to cede 23 million acres of land (Map 7.4).%u00a9 Bedford, Freeman & Worth Publishers. For review purposes only. Do not distribute.